You have to wonder whom to believe, don't you?
BushCo has always said that the war was not about oil. It was about faulty intelligence, it seems.
Before we get to the oil quote, let's give a little background so that we have a sense of whom to believe, shall we?
(Damn. How come Atrios and others get pages of first box and we don't? More after the freakin' fold, since I want to keep things together. Damn.)
Textbook Case I
Rumsfeld came out and said,
"They are currently putting people into Iraq to do things that are harmful to the future of Iraq," said Donald Rumsfeld. "And we know it. And it is something that they, I think, will look back on as having been an error in judgment."
I know that I have to take a deep breath and wonder about that, don't you?
Then, at a news conference with Rumsfeld, General Pace, yesterday, weighs in on the situation.
Today, Pace, the top U.S. military official, was asked at a Pentagon news conference if he has proof that Iran's government is sponsoring these activities.
"I do not, sir," Pace said.
Ouch! Called the President and the Secretary of Defense liars!
So, what was Rumsfeld's response?
Rumsfeld, standing beside Pace, said today it is difficult to ascertain whether the Iranian government is directly involved in sending military equipment and personnel to Iraq.
This comes one day after Rumsfeld had just said, as you see from the quote higher up on this page, "We know it." And no one confronted Rumsfeld on that. Wussies.
Textbook Case II
It's long been rumored that the superbases that the US is building in Iraq are meant to be permanent. Of course, BushCo has denied that.
Yet, as we see from this article from exactly one year ago:
Brig. General Robert Pollman, chief engineer of base construction in Iraq, caused a stir--and forced his superiors to engage in damage control--when he told the Chicago Tribune last spring that the bases could be a "swap" for bases in Saudi Arabia. The United States has been closing bases and drawing down its forces in the kingdom in response to the growing unpopularity of the American presence there and repeated terror attacks. In mid-2003, roughly 4,500 U.S. troops reportedly redeployed from Saudi Arabia to Qatar, leaving only about 500 in the kingdom.
Karen Kwiatkowski, a retired Air Force lieutenant colonel who served in the office of the Secretary of Defense until spring 2003, and has since become an outspoken critic of the war, says that the neoconservative architects of the Iraq invasion definitely foresaw a permanent, large-scale presence. Kwiatkowski says that Pentagon planners view the bases as vital both for protecting Israel and as launchpads for operations in Syria and Iran. The Pentagon, she says, went into the war assuming that once Saddam was toppled a so-called Status of Forces Agreement, like those the U.S. government signed with Japan and South Korea, could be quickly reached with Iraq. The growth of the insurgency and the vocal opposition to a prolonged U.S. occupation among Iraqi leaders haven't changed the plan, Kwiatkowski insists: "We're pouring concrete. We're building little fiefdoms with security, moats, and walls.... Eighty percent of Iraqis will grouse, but they have no political power," she says. "We'll stay whether they want us to or not."
The Bush administration is the gang that can't get its story straight.
So, why would we need these huge bases in Iraq? Is this how we promote democracy, by invading a country and establishing permanent bases, even though polls show that 80% of the Iraqis want us out?
Why do we need the bases? Hmmm...
Finally, Textbook Case III
You know, us leftist, America-hating radicals have said, since before the war, that it was about the oil.
However, in this 2002 article, Lawrence Goldstein, president of the Petroleum Industry Research Foundation, said,
"If we go to war it's not about oil.... But after Saddam, it becomes all about oil."
Now, I certainly believe the PIRF President, don't you? Well, I believe the 2nd part of his statement, except for the word "becomes".
We all know how many times BushCo has denied it's about the oil. But as General Pace showed yesterday, the military isn't going to cooperate in twisting intelligence, anymore.
Finally, dear readers, the BIG news: General John Abizaid says, in an article in al-Jazeera about our plans for long-term military bases in Iraq, that,
"Ultimately it comes down to the free flow of goods and resources on which the prosperity of our own nation and everybody else in the world depend."
Was Gen. Abizaid suggesting that Iraqi tennis shoes or nightgowns is what the world depends on? Certainly, he wasn't talking about Iraq's #2 export these days (gratis President Bush), terrorism.
No. He talking about the only export from Iraq that the world depends on, which would be... drum-roll please! OIL!
And, as a part of his statement, he confirms that our permanent bases are probably just that.
Is there any doubt that our beat-to-war on Iran is about the very same thing? And then Syria.
The neo-cons have been requesting the U.S. government take on this triumvirate ever since the neo-con birthing center, the Project for the New American Century sent a letter to Clinton in 1998, espousing that Iraq become the next target of American world dominance.
We are writing you because we are convinced that current American policy toward Iraq is not succeeding, and that we may soon face a threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since the end of the Cold War. In your upcoming State of the Union Address, you have an opportunity to chart a clear and determined course for meeting this threat. We urge you to seize that opportunity, and to enunciate a new strategy that would secure the interests of the U.S. and our friends and allies around the world. That strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein's regime from power. We stand ready to offer our full support in this difficult but necessary endeavor.
Apparently, though, that 'support' did not include encouraging white, Christian men to enlist in the Armed Forces. It reminds me of the old line: Let's you and him fight. You really must view the letter to read the list of signers. Notice any familiar names?
F***g cowards and liars, the lot of them.