Conflict and the Protection of Oil

Whether or not United States (US) President Donald Trump is really "lock and loaded" to respond to the accused group or State responsible for last Saturday's attack upon Saudi Arabia's oil fields, one thing appears as disturbingly true: that the Kingdom's source of wealth supersedes the right to life, liberty and determination of all the war-torn people of Yemen and Syria as well as the disenfranchised people of Palestine.

Trump's quick verbal response to the oilfields attack, which has been blamed on Iran, is indicative of the long standing capitalist preference to place protection of economic goods over the well being of communities of nations and peoples, thus displaying a clear deference to executing conflict in the protection of oil and such.

No distinct response has been uttered by the US president to the bombings of medical facilities, schools and innocent people within Syria. None has been said against the prolonged demise of many poor Yemeni children, who are suffering under a Saudi-led coalition in the ongoing war. Plans to annex Palestinian lands and the everyday pangs of the Palestinian people from Gaza to the West Bank have certainly not garnered any "lock and loaded" responses.

Yet, the instant Saudi Arabia's wealth source is attacked, conflict immediately seems more probable. 

Is Saudi Arabian oil worthy of a hot conflict? Is it not the said Saudi Arabia whose citizens were the vast majority of the 9/11 terrorists? Is it not the same Saudi Arabia that intelligence has concluded killed a US newspaper journalist within its embassy in Turkey? Is in not the same Saudi Arabia that publicly beheads people? And is it not the said Saudi Arabia that has harbors a bad human rights record?

It is possible that US economic tides and pacts with the Kingdom would overshadow the mentioned infractions. A sad reality toward conflict in the protection of oil.