Sunday, March 05, 2006


Was reading over at the Egyptian Sand Monkey’s blog, came across this post - http://egyptiansandmonkey.blogspot.com/2005/04/it-wasnt-about-oil-stupid.html - and while I enjoy his take-no-prisoners attitude, and I appreciate the perspective from across the ocean, gotta disagree with a number of points he made – all of them good, I might add.

It wasn’t all done for oil. That was a factor, a major one, to be sure. The other two majors are: Shrub’s re-election, and Israeli security.

SAM says: “As for the re-election, let's be honest, the Iraq war was Bush's weakest point up to the election. It was his most vulnerable side at the time, cause let's face it, back then it wasn't going very well.”

Excuse me? I think not. All due respect, I live in this country, and I watched all of these things unfold, very carefully.

First off,

  1. Nobody is going to change leaders midstream, regardless of how badly the conflict is going, especially in the very beginning.  

  2. By the commentary of almost EVERYONE in this administration, Iraq was going to be a ‘breeze’.
(I will skip over the obvious and scary re-election tactics employed in the 2004 election.)

"My belief is we will, in fact, be greeted as liberators." –Vice President Dick Cheney, "Meet the Press," March 16, 2003.

"Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties." —President Bush, discussing the Iraq war with Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson, after Robertson told him he should prepare the American people for casualties.

‘We promised this would be the most powerful campaign ever seen, and it will be. It will be unlike any we have seen in the history of warfare, with breathtaking precision, almost eye-watering speed, persistence, agility and lethality” — Vice-Admiral Timothy Keating, US Navy. By Day Six US forces were bogged down by heavy resistance and bad weather 60 miles south of Baghdad .‘The Iraqi people understand what this crisis is about. Like the people of France in the 1940s, they view us as their hoped-for liberators’ — Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Defense Secretary, March 11.

In short, the administration, from all appearances, thought we’d be in and out in months. Rumsfeld (?) guesstimated about 15 weeks.

Not about oil? Not all of it. Factored into the equation in a major way, however:

Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage: “This is not Afghanistan…When we approach the question of Iraq, we realize here is a country which has a resource. And it’s obvious, it’s oil. And it can bring in and does bring in a certain amount of revenue each year…$10, $15, even $18 billion…this is not a broke country.” [Source: House Committee on Appropriations Hearing on a Supplemental War Regulation, 3/27/03]
Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz: “There’s a lot of money to pay for this that doesn’t have to be U.S. taxpayer money, and it starts with the assets of the Iraqi people…and on a rough recollection, the oil revenues of that country could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years…We’re dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon.” [Source: House Committee on Appropriations Hearing on a Supplemental War Regulation, 3/27/03]
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld: “If you [Source: worry about just] the cost, the money, Iraq is a very different situation from Afghanistan…Iraq has oil. They have financial resources.” [Source: Fortune Magazine, Fall 2002]
State Department Official Alan Larson: “On the resource side, Iraq itself will rightly shoulder much of the responsibilities. Among the sources of revenue available are $1.7 billion in invested Iraqi assets, the found assets in Iraq…and unallocated oil-for-food money that will be deposited in the development fund.” [Source: Senate Foreign Relations Committee Hearing on Iraq Stabilization, 06/04/03]
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld: “I don't believe that the United States has the responsibility for reconstruction, in a sense…[Reconstruction] funds can come from those various sources I mentioned: frozen assets, oil revenues and a variety of other things, including the Oil for Food, which has a very substantial number of billions of dollars in it. [Source: Senate Appropriations Hearing, 3/27/03]
Oh, and as a sidebar (still salient), a REAL eye opener: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1205-05.htm - Ex-General Says Israel Inflated Iraqi Threat (original source: L.A Times).

Again: http://www.tau.ac.il/jcss/bbcnews0512.htm - Israelis 'misread' Iraqi threat – The BBC.
Again: http://ipsnews.net/interna.asp?idnews=23083 - War Launched to Protect Israel - Bush Adviser

And I will never, EVER forget that newsclip – Bush being asked what he would do if not re-elected, and he looked straight at the camera – dead on, no hesitation, the rare moment where the Commander-in-Thief was being explicitly candid – and replied: “I have no intention of losing my job.” (paraphrased)

In short – yes, it WAS about the oil. And the re-election. And Israel security.

Stumble Upon Toolbar


Mesoforte said...

I still think that Bush rigs votes. (Well, not Bush, but his rich friends.)

Krystalline Apostate said...

No, not Bush! He's a good xtian!
Yeah, still convinced Kerry was a schill. Gave up WAY too easy. Not even 24 hrs. Just me I suppose.

Mesoforte said...

Think that's bad, my mom's really paranoid about. I swear that she creates half the conspiracy theories. ^_~

say no to christ said...

Hey, lets not forget another reason Bush wanted to invade Iraq. Location, location, location! Iraq is smack dab in the middle of the ME and gives our troops direct and easy access to all its well known enemies and oil buddies.

My husband was involved with planning deployments and stratagy tactics as well as serving two tours to Iraq and he broke it all down for me. BUT, I still say it all goes back to the oil!

I agree with meso! The election was rigged both times. The peace and justice group my husband and I belonged to when we lived in NC and still keep up with, showed a documentary about how it was done. It was horrifying and disheartening. Our country is completely broken and the majority of people are blind to it. I dont believe I am a conspiracy theorist, but I am not dumb and I know how history works. It is always the victor that writes the history and it is well known that many ancient kings on up to even today write the history how they see fit. Bush and his buddies have been and are re-writing and writing the history to make them look like heroes.

Krystalline Apostate said...

Aye, & let's never forget, Kuwait was stealing Iraqi oil prior to the 1st conflict, & Hussein sent a telegraph to the WH, asking permission.
To which they said, "Yes."
The rest is history written to serve the national identity.

say no to christ said...

GREAT point Ra!!! America loves to hide their dirty deeds and loves war!

say no to christ said...

I found a GREAT magazine the other day at the book store. 'Ancient American' Archaeology of the Americas before Columbus. There was a page that had a website called 'Disinformation'. Here is a link to it. There are a lot of catagories, I reccomend all of them.


HairlessMonkeyDK said...

"Nobody is going to change leaders midstream".

Which may be true of some folks.
But the reasoning behind such a thing is faulty.
If someone's making a mess of things... of things that get people killed, no less... you DON'T hire him back on.
Unless you're frontal lobe-handicapped.

And I, too, still have grave questions regarding both Bush-elections.

"By the commentary of almost EVERYONE in this administration, Iraq was going to be a ‘breeze’."

Yes... Shows how stupidity is contagious.
Look, really, even a palooka
like -me- could have told 'em differently.
But of course, no one would listen.
And so, here we are.

I agree, Uncy Relucty,
it WASN'T just about oil...
it was more about arrogance
and the idea "Hey, I'm a cow-tippin'-boy, I's know rite from rong, an' I get ta use the worl' as my playground.".

Krystalline Apostate said...

Unless you're frontal lobe-handicapped.
I hate sayin' this of me own countrymen, really I do, but what do you expect of folks what think the way they're told? Vast imbibers of that 'fast food' (which is neither fast nor food), buy gas hogs when we have dependence on other countries for the fuel, and get offended at the slightest observation?
I mean, really. Bootstrapping days are a thing of the past, they are.
I think the cowboy diplomacy thing is a holdover from the romanticism of the old West/blazing Pioneers mindset. Not to mention the excessive credit we take for ending WWII.
How long does gratitude last, anyways?

HairlessMonkeyDK said...

"Not to mention the excessive credit we take for ending WWII.
How long does gratitude last, anyways?"

Because the U.S. was very... hehee!
RELUCTANT from entering that war.
Still... here I find myself in the ultra-weird position of defending YOUR country 'gainst yerself...
because you've already pointed out why they don't know better.
Not that our (Danish) people are that much better...
During the whole mohammed-drawings thing, lemming-like Danes have flocked to the right-wing... which is like pissin' yer pants to keep warm... pleasant at first, then, suddenly, ballfreezin'.

Krystalline Apostate said...

Well, you didn't sound too much like defendin' me country at all.
Love this quote:
"Ignorance is the beginning of wisdom, wisdom the knowledge of ignorance, and stupidity the function of mankind."
I'm bettin' a no-prize NONE of me readers will nail THAT source.

HairlessMonkeyDK said...

"Well, you didn't sound too much like defendin' me country at all."

Maybe not.
Got any clues -why-? Heeeh...