Elect Barack Obama
Impeach Bush & Cheney!
"Google" your Voter Registration
Register to Vote
Vote Early-Absentee-Nov4
Visit the Democratic Party
Greenspan's Inconvenient Truth: We Invaded Iraq for its Oil
Alan Greenspan's new book, The Age of Turbulence, has one terse sentence that is shaking Washington:
I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows. The Iraq war is largely about oil.
On CNN’s Late Edition, Wolf Blitzer was shocked by the simple truth. But House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Tom Lantos (D-CA), largely agrees:
LANTOS: To a very large extent I agree with him, and I think it is very remarkable that it took Alan Greenspan all these many years and being out of office for stating the obvious. It is self-evident that this administration would not have taken the position it has had it not been for the oil issue.
Before the invasion of Iraq, many of us insisted Bush's motive for invading Iraq was for its oil. And one Democrat actually dared to say this on TV on Feb 23, 2003, three weeks before the invasion - Rep. Dennis Kucinich.
MR. RUSSERT: Congressman, you made a very strong charge against the administration and let me show you what you said on January 19. “Why is the Administration targeting Iraq? Oil.” What do you base that on?
REP. KUCINICH: I base that on the fact that there is $5 trillion worth of oil above and in the ground in Iraq, that individuals involved in the administration have been involved in the oil industry, that the oil industry certainly would benefit from having the administration control Iraq, and that the fact is that, since no other case has been made to go to war against Iraq, for this nation to go to war against Iraq, oil represents the strongest incentive.
MR. RUSSERT: Do you believe the president of the United States would risk the lives of American men and women for oil?
REP. KUCINICH: I think that to answer that question would be to put a focus on a person, and I think the policy is what we have to talk about, that this policy to go against Iraq was promulgated even before 9/11, and the day after 9/11, the secretary of Defense in a meeting of the National Security Council said we could use this moment to go after Iraq, even though there was no connection. I think that when a president commits the young men and women of this country to battle, that it should only be when there is an imminent threat to this country, and that—I believe most sincerely that one of the motivating factors involved in this effort to strike against Iraq is the desire on the part of some to be able to control the oil interests in Iraq. I believe that.
Russert was shocked and outraged that Kucinich would dare suggest such a thing.
But look who said it - not only the man regarded as The Oracle, The Knower Of All Known Things - but also the husband of Russert's own NBC News colleague Andrea Mitchell!
I'd say Russert owes Kucinich a profound apology - and a whole show with Iraq oil politics experts like Antonia Juhasz and Juan Cole to focus on the role of oil Bush's the decision to invade Iraq - and to plan to stay forever.
- Bob Fertik's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Printer-friendly version- Send to friend
Join us & contribute
Proud members of the Democratic Party
Copyright 2006 Democrats.com. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy
The Great Public Unraveling
Greenspan's acknowledgment of the actual geo-political interests the Bush administration was pursuing in invading and occupying Iraq is the beginning of the great public unraveling of the phony rationale Bush used to get public support and Congressional authorization for the war.
Recently, a top Australian public official made the same admission, namely that Australia was militarily supporting the U.S. in Iraq to make sure Australia had access to oil, but like Greenspan was quickly made to retract it.
Experts and well-informed individuals have always known that the real objective was not WMDs or building democracy in Iraq but securing continued U.S. access to cheap oil by transferring control of Iraqi oil assets to Western oil companies.
Contrary to international law governing military invasions, oil companies in league with Bush, such as the Texas oil company that recently signed an oil deal with the Kurds in Northern Iraq, have been jockeying for access to Iraqi oil assets since the invasion, supported by the oil agreement the Bush administration has been pushing the Maliki government to sign.
As the public connects the dots, it will slowly but surely realize the long-standing complicity of not only the Bush administration but many U.S. administrations and European countries -- especially the UK -- with dictatorial Middle Eastern monarchies awash in oil revenues. Together, they fanned the flames of terrorism on the part of the leaders of the starving Arab populations in these countries that led to the attacks of 9/11 in New York, as well as those in Madrid, Spain and London, England.
I would have to say that
out of all the people I know and interact with EVERYONE knew from the beginning that it was about the oil, except perhaps 1 percent of people who have no thoughts of their own other than the mainstream media. For these talking heads to deny it or act as if they're angry about the obvious truth just seems so ridiculous. How is it that 95 percent or more of average Joe's have always known that it's all about the oil and these so-called information specialists are so friggin shocked about it. That's just absurd. Thank goodness some of these people are starting to admit the obvious.