babble home - news for the rest of us
today's active topics

FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » the middle east and central asia   » It really was all about oil

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: It really was all about oil
Babbler # 1292

posted 26 May 2003 10:26 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So, no WMD's and now a document proving the only motive was the liberation of Iraqi oil:

Sunday Herald

Strategic Energy Policy Challenges For The 21st Century describes how America is facing the biggest energy crisis in its history. It targets Saddam as a threat to American interests because of his control of Iraqi oilfields and recommends the use of 'military intervention' as a means to fix the US energy crisis.

The report is linked to a veritable who's who of US hawks, oilmen and corporate bigwigs. It was commissioned by James Baker, the former US Secretary of State under George Bush Snr, and submitted to Vice-President Dick Cheney in April 2001 -- [i]a full five months before September 11[i]. Yet it advocates a policy of using military force against an enemy such as Iraq to secure US access to, and control of, Middle Eastern oil fields.

Italics mine. Maybe the conspiracy nuts are on to something.

[ 26 May 2003: Message edited by: WingNut ]

From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Babbler # 490

posted 26 May 2003 10:46 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The thing that worries me is that the bullying tactics the US is using with Iran may cause Iran to pull another "1979". That would be Bad Mojo.

The US might "feel it necessary" to invade Iran. Not good for all concerned.

[ 26 May 2003: Message edited by: DrConway ]

From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Babbler # 3838

posted 27 May 2003 04:31 AM      Profile for beluga2     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
the report also backs 'de-fanging' Saddam through weapons inspectors and then moving in to take control of Iraqi oil.

Man... that's an eerily accurate description of what eventually ended up happening, isn't it?

From: vancouvergrad, BCSSR | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
Babbler # 3493

posted 27 May 2003 11:23 AM      Profile for evenflow        Edit/Delete Post
What I find most alarming, is that the white house did such a good job from the PR side of things, that many people STILL think it was about disarming Iraq.

Apparantly, its generally acceptable to destroy, kill, lie, cheat and steal abroad, as long as bush lays wreaths on the graves of the dead soldiers on the evening news once in a while.

orwell was right when he said it would eventually not matter what you did, as long as you used the right words to describe what you were doing. enter collateral language.

From: learning land | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008