This theoretical argument is very clear and appropriate for this paper. It specifies important aspects of the issue which render explanations and foundations for discussion. This theoretical argument help sets the tone for the rest of the discussion as it bears to mind the direction of the politics as it unfolds in the Chad.
In order to tentatively answer the issue raised in this paper, the author raised different possible mechanisms which apply to the paper. In applying such possibilities to the study, the author considered the possibility that econometric work can only create correlations and that qualitative work is needed in order to identify the mechanisms which are underneath these correlations (Humphrey, 2005). It is difficult to evaluate whether the author meant this statement as a hypothesis or a tentative consideration for the problem/issue which was raised. Nevertheless, the statement presents a possible direction for the discussion to take in terms of answering the issues raised by the research study. The study also mentions six possible mechanisms which explain the relationship between war or conflict and resources. These mechanisms include: greedy rebels mechanism, greedy outsiders mechanism, grievance mechanism, feasibility mechanism, weak states mechanism, sparse networks mechanism (Humphrey, 2005). These mechanisms have been laid out as tentative considerations for this research. They help lay out possible directions for research in terms of impact on war/conflict as impacted by resources. For purposes of this study, the researcher chose the rebel greed mechanism as a means of explaining the issue topic of this discussion (Humphrey, 2005). This mechanism was chosen based on its applicability to the points raised during the analysis of Chad. In this mechanism, domestic groups are seen to engage in quasi-criminal activities in order to benefit from resources independent from the state. To some extent, these rebels seek power through these resources; and they want to further their ends by seeking