Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,265
- 126
Maybe its time to look at these again:
http://www.judicialwatch.org/iraqi-oilfield-pr.shtml
http://www.judicialwatch.org/IraqOilMap.pdf
http://www.judicialwatch.org/IraqOilFrgnSuitors.pdf
http://www.judicialwatch.org/IraqOilGasProj.pdf
More information:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/4354269.stm
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0317-23.htm
http://www.encyclopedia.com/video/aiWGqGCFcZg-iraq-war-is-largely-about.aspx
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/16/AR2007091601287.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2003/jul/13/oilandpetrol.iraq
I could keep finding more links but the point is: to say that oil was not a factor in the initial intention to go to Iraq is disingenuous at best. The fact that it didn't turn out that way and probably won't - as evidenced by recent auctions and Iraqi govt actions - does not make the smokescreen reasons more valid.
Some have argued that Bush believed Saddam was a bad person, but part of that belief came from his ideological position which is best described in PNAC documents. And American power, control and reliability of strategic resources had a lot to do with that belief.
The claim by many whacked people is that we went into Iraq to grab the oil, and that's wrong. Was oil a factor at all? If you are going to have a war in the Middle East it sure as hell is.
The problem is that simple minds don't really want to look at context and to see if what they claim makes sense.
The prime reason to go to war was to Get Saddam. Why? Because Bush and those who are on the "blood for oil" kick are pretty much the same. Don't bother to look, and for heaven's sake don't do anything to question the premise.
That said, Bush DID believe Saddam was evil. He had to have WMDs because his tiny worldview insisted he did. He had to be a terrorist supporter because he just had to be.
Consequently he and those around him decided to pull another Vietnam in that there were realities larger than facts.
Bush explained in agonizing detail why he wanted to go to war, and people being what they are insisted there was more. What else is in Iraq? Oil. It must be oil!
Curiously, some who detested Bush for what he is decided to make his arguments for him, or at least that's how I'm reading it.
Saddam was all about Saddam, and those types are godsends to those who engage in international intrigue. They don't operate under a philosophical mandate. It's about getting control over their environment and profiting from it. Saddam is like many people in that way, but he had a nasty habit of killing people to get what he wanted.
That last bit is important. Saddam didn't gain power to kill people, but he killed them to acquire and keep it.
The proper people could have had him dancing on his head thinking it was his idea.
So why didn't we do that? Because it wasn't about oil, it was about Satan himself inhabiting Saddam (yes that is hyperbole). From this basic concept everything else follows. Saddam was a threat to us, to the region, to apple pie, to oil, to Krispy Kreme donuts if it came to it. Note how oil falls into it? It's somewhere, but what it is not is a main reason to go to war in an attempt to secure Iraq as a oil supply for the US.
First, assign all the faults of humanity to Saddam, then the end justifies the means.
In that context virtually everything that happened falls out as a natural consequence.
Bush wasn't greedy. He wasn't even stupid. He was Ahab hunting Moby Dick, just as I said at the beginning of the war.
Sometimes things aren't all that complicated.