Now It's In Our Face-We Can No Longer Be In Denial-Us Invaded Iraq For The Oil

[kpete]

Oil and Betrayal in Iraq
By George Lakoff
t r u t h o u t | Perspective

Thursday 20 September 2007

Alan Greenspan should know. It was oil all along. The former head of the Federal Reserve writes in his memoir, "The Age of Turbulence: Adventures in a New World," "I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil." Greenspan even advised Bush that "taking Saddam Hussein out was essential" to protect oil supplies.

Yes, we suspected it. In a deep sense, many of us knew it, just as those in Washington did. But now it's in our face. Greenspan put the mother of all facts in front of our noses. And we can no longer be in denial. The US invaded Iraq for the oil.

Think about what it means for our troops and for the people of Iraq. Our troops were told, and believed because they trusted their president, they were in Iraq to protect America, to protect their families, their homes, their friends and neighbors, our democracy. But they were betrayed. Those troops fought and died and were maimed and had their marriages break up for oil company profits. An utter betrayal of our men and women in uniform and their families, a betrayal of their sacrifices, day after day, month after month, year after year - and for some, forever! Children growing up fatherless or motherless. Men and women without legs or arms or faces - for oil company profits.

And hundreds of thousands of Iraqis killed, more maimed, and millions made refugees. For oil profits.

very powerful essay (I just posted the first few paragraphs) at:
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/092007B.shtml

[IDemo]

1. Wolfowitz (2003): Iraq war was about oil

Asked why a nuclear power such as North Korea was being treated differently from Iraq, where hardly any weapons of mass destruction had been found, the deputy defence minister said: "Let's look at it simply. The most important difference between North Korea and Iraq is that economically, we just had no choice in Iraq. The country swims on a sea of oil."

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/aboutoil.htm

[hunter]

3. Wolfowitz was wrong about the oil.

Oil is difficult to get out of the ground, and it's harder still when the people living above it are shooting at you.

Oil production facilities and their workers are easy targets. A hostile people can dump a lot of oil they don't want exported onto the ground or into the water with one small bomb.

Wolfowitz is a damned fool. There is no "sea of oil" anywhere, and what we've got is limited, whether production starts declining now (which seems likely), or fifty years from now.

We're like a bloody lottery winner who spent all the money on crack, and now we're sitting here with a trashed body and twisted mind, broke and wondering what the hell we are going to do.

Wolfowitz was never more than a junkie with a hand gun and a ski mask living in a big fancy house that wasn't his -- same as the rest of the Bush Administration freak show.

They tried to rob the neighborhood convenience store but the pissed off clerk shot them in the gut.

We're all bleeding now.

[Kolesar]

2. When I was an officer candidate, it was explained to me that our function was not to defend against

...Communism. Our function was to defend America's interests. The military is able to find enough young people without a broad worldview who don't realize that they are being asked to fight and maybe die for companies who have "control" of the US government.

There are also a few gung-ho types who would not be bothered by the thought of having the role of corporate enforcer.

It's the Smedley Butler, USMC thesis. He objected to the marines being used as a colonial strike force.