Several posters (including Devilstower, one of my favorites) have discussed the oil deal reached last month by Ray L. Hunt of Hunt Oil with Kurdistan. The deal permits Kurdistan (Iraq territory to the north) to contract with W's friend for a production sharing deal.
The deal is controversial because it is directly contrary to the Iraq government's proposed oil law which would funnel all such deals through the government to equalize the revenues earned throughout Iraq.
Paul Krugman writing in the San Jose Mercury News published an article yesterday entitled "Bush ally's Kurdish oil deal proves the surge has failed."
Scott Horton from Harpers.org has published, today, an article which connects the dots between the Iraq war and oil revenues by reviewing Alan Greenspan's new book, just out.
The bottom line, Bush and Cheney, from the very beginning brought this mess about to carve out Iraq oil reserves among U.S. oil interests, or, I should be more specific: to carve out Iraq oil reserves to Bush and Co. friends and supporters. Not only is Mr. Hunt a Bush friend and ally but he is a member of the President's Foreign intelligence Advisory Board.
I am left asking the obvious question as to what Mr. Hunt knew, as a policy advisor, and did he take that information and used it for his own personal benefit. Yes, I already do know the answer to this question.
More importantly, Mr. Krugman also connects the dots and proposes that Bush and Co. already knew the civil war was lost months ago. They know Iraq will have to be carved out, like Yugoslavia was, and divided into sectarian states. Bush's friends are reaping the benefits of the division before Bush and Co. admit that no other viable option exists.
As frequent Daily Kos readers already know, Senator Biden has been a frequent speaker stating that in fact the sectarian division is a foregone conclusion. Is he the only one admitting or telling the truth? Clearly the Bush administration is not as they want to parade General Petraes on us and convince us that there is a viable reason why thousands more Americans will be killed, and even more Iraqis, before his term is up.
I titled this blog "War for Oil" but clearly it should have been "American blood for oil".
Scott Horton references an article in today's London Times which quotes Alan Greenspan admitting that all evidence points to the fact that the war was waged to protect U.S. oil interests as Saddam Hussein continued rule in Iraq was a threat to those interests.
Mr. Horton also points to an observation by Paul O'Neill, as described in his biography, that he had occasion to come upon Dick Cheney bent over maps of Iraqi oilfields "which he appeared to be dividing up for foreign development".
So is the whole "surge" strategy yet another Bush & Co. ploy to buy time to keep U.S. troops in Iraq while Bush cronnies divide up the Iraq oil interests and increase their negotiating power by circumventing the alleged Iraq government and going directly to the sectarian interests?
Hard to believe this conclusion is probably true. The evidence continues to accumulate while Bush's term comes to an end.
He and his adivisors have absolutely no plan to set timetables and/or to set a withdrawal plan in place. There is no plan because there doesn't need to be one as Bush's friends rape and pillage the country and its people.
Finally, this explains one of the last prevailing mysteries in this mess which has been why has virtually no effort been made for diplomatic talks between the various sectarian interests and the U.S. Again, the obvious answer is that Bush & Co.'s friends have far more to gain if the country is broken up and they can negotiate deals directly with the individual groups than to have to deal with a formal government. This is why Condeleeza Rice has been virtually absent from the region and little if any discussion have been held to try to keep the country together.