Does the US really go to war because of the access to oil in other countries?
user
Not because of oil per se, although there’s always a motivation of a country to seek oil or minerals and resources elsewhere.
assistant
We don't put ground troops in poor countries?
user
It depends on whether you look at troops in Iraq or troops in Rwanda.
assistant
We have troops in Rwanda?
user
That's a poor analogy.  We had troops in Iraq.
assistant
Yeah.
user
There were never troops in Rwanda, and it was mostly a humanitarian mission.  It's important to draw a distinction between the two.
assistant
Does the US really go to war because of the access to oil in other countries?
user
Not because of oil per se, although there’s always a motivation of a country to seek oil or minerals and resources elsewhere.
assistant
We don't put ground troops in poor countries?
user
It depends on whether you look at troops in Iraq or troops in Rwanda.
assistant
We have troops in Rwanda?
user
That's a poor analogy.  We had troops in Iraq.
assistant
Yeah.
user
That's what we call a non sequitur.  Let me start over.  Countries with more resources have a longer-term security.  They do not need to go to war against other countries to protect their security, so they can afford to be more selective with how they do that.  If you think about it this way, that's why US military action in the Middle East is focused on war-torn countries in the Middle East, and not in more stable countries in Europe and Asia.
assistant
Does the US really go to war because of the access to oil in other countries?