Alan Greenspan is going to claim in his memoir that the U. S. invaded Iraq because of oil. If that's the case, then the war for Mideast oil has also failed. The U. S. invasion of Iraq did not lead to increased Iraqi oil production, has partially destabilized Saudi Arabia, and seemingly put Iran and the U. S. on the road to a military collision.
Middle Eastern oil supplies are less stable than ever.
But perhaps the Bush administration wanted the Middle East to be less stable and wanted lower oil production as a way to jack up oil prices.
Yeah, that's the ticket.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
17 comments:
WarForOil and NoBloodForOil are my all-time favorite Leftist bumper stickers.
Alan Greenspan is the leader of Code Pink, JD. Most people don't know that, but most people don't know Alan Greenspan, lifelong Republican and friend of Ayn Rand, is a liberal. A card-carrying ACLU communist if I'm not mistaken.
Professor Caric, can you do a post on your favorite Right-wing justifications for war: the Domino theory and "we've got to fight them over there or they will follow us home" are tied right now for me. The domino theory still has cachet, because it was able to kill more people (so that we could save them from Communism). It'll take a lot more death in Iraq to match the folks we "saved" in Indochina, but both phrases are so colossally stupid, they're endearing.
It would be a cool post.
Anyway, I'm off to continue reading my Alan Greenspan autographed copy of Das Kapital. Man, Greenspan is a such a lefty.
LOL!! That would be a good idea but right now I've got to listen to my copy of "Give Peace a Chance." John Warner signed it just for me.
"All we are saying . . ."
"perhaps the Bush administration wanted the Middle East to be less stable and wanted lower oil production as a way to jack up oil prices."
That's the story. Take a look at the plans People For a New American Century (PNAC) already had in mind 10 years ago.
Is there any doubt that the real and overriding objective of these reptiles was/is to either steal Iraqi, and eventually all Middle Eastern oil, or barring that get the price per barrel way up in order to line their pockets? Nope, no doubt at all.
Apparently there is some disagreement. Oddly from Greenspan himself. Not that one should bother with context when confronted with such an issue
btw, cutnpaste, that is how you reference an entire article without earning yourself a nickname.
Wow, ef, that was extremely polite and pleasant.
Is there a new polite and pleasant policy? I did refrain from tossing in something like "shitforbrains", but I've always been sorta pleasant like that.
I remain curious to read your take on Greenspan directly contradicting not only the current Blood for Oil go round, but all previous "outrages" as well. That he states it was him that brought it up, because NO ONE ELSE in the Bush Admin was presenting that argument may be too much for you to work into your world view, but give it a try.
I read the Washington Post article you cited. Was I under an obligation to write a book report? Any obligation I may have felt surely dissipated with your second post.
Mr. Greenspan is doing what all good partisans do when they realize they stepped in it: he's backtracking. Greenspan thought he was speaking, as usual, to a level above the commoners he disdains, and to find that these plebians stole his line and were using against the Republicans...? Outrage!
So, like any number of former administration officials (John Dilullo and Christine Whitman leap to mind), the White House goes into damage control mode and Greenspan came along.
The most exciting part for me is how easily you ar eled astray by your talk show masters and blogging svengalis. Greenspan's damning critique of the Bushies is not about Iraq (that needs no critique), it's about how the Bushies put policy before governance. How they cut taxes to make the rich richer. How they exploded the deficit.
Greenspan decries all these things (a little too late if you ask me, but his lateness shows he's still a partisan, Ayn Rand-loving hack), and these are the politices the numbnuts in your party's presidential race STILL refuse to repudiate. Thompson, that old bastard, was still droning on about tax cuts the last time I heard him.
The fact that a Republicans Republican, a man who spent a year convincing President Clinton not to lower taxes, but to stabilize the bond market anbd thus launch economic growth and income gains across all sectors, is criticizing Bush/Cheney for that means all the smart people have to wave a shiny quarter in the face of the rubes, so they can't follow along.
Dammit, Rush likes his third house with the gold-plated nozzles and he'll be damned if he's gonna pay taxes.
Frankly, ef, I was surprised you were so easily fooled. As for Greenspan "repudiating" his claim. Yes, saying "I always assumed it was for oil, but no one told me that" is a quite an impressive denunciation.
It's on par with "I never had sexual relations with that woman...." in its level of believability.
timmah - Is everyone that disagrees with you a partisan hack? First General Petraeus, now Alan Greenspan. Good Allah. President Bush's influence knows no bounds. Not bad for an uncurious dumb hick.
Greenspan has been Republican since the 40's, JD, and his partisanship owes nothing to the President. Since you are an expert, could you explain to us why Mr. Budget hawk, suddenly decided tax cuts were good for the economy in 2001? He claimed the Bush tax cuts that he doesn't like in 2007 should be made permament in 2004 (hint: an election year).
He always was a partisan. Being able to put that aside for 8 years and work with someone he didn't vote for or like is how public institutions are supposed to work and a key to why the Fed is respected.
As for Patraeus, the man participated in a war room set-up between Baghdad and the White House. he wrote an op-ed 6 weeks before a national election that was dead wrong on every one of its prescriptions. He placed charts in front of the rubes on TV that "reported attacks" and "Deaths", but refused to count deaths due to car bombs and determined there was a difference between a sectarian killing and not the criminal killings caused by our invasion.
The man is out for himself, JD, and, if you read the testimony, instead of Protein Wisdom and Rightwingsparkle, you might figure that out. He will retiure within the next three years and pick a Senate seat to run for. Guess which Party he will choose.....hint: it starts with an "R".
If one is prone to find a conspiracy under every rock ...
Where is there conspiracy talk in there?
On a serious note, do we know the sex of those pre-natal little ones yet?
tim - The little one is fine.
I refuse to discuss my personal life with you any longer. You have routinely mocked me, my profession, distorted my views, and mocked my experience. I offered to have you and your family to my home, offered to forward your resume to various attorneys, and in response I have seen nothing but bad faith on your part.
Fair enough. I will state, you did not explicitly offer those things, although you may have felt you did. I didn't mention it any further, as I didn't think they were serious. I apologize for mis-reading them.
Specifically for the resume, wouldn't that require an exchange of personal info? You have been loathe to do so in the past (my name is available on PW, thanks to the estimable work of Mr. Goldstein), but you have not. For instance, your nickname/username is unlikely to be your initials (as much as I always wanted you to be the guy from Scrubs).
In my defense, I always interpreted the lack of an explicit offer to be a sign you wanted to keep your personal info to yourself and that is good internet policy.
As for your profession, I WANT to be a part of that profession. Your industry I do often find loathsome, but that's because of the corporate practices of people much higher than you. Insurance is not and was not evil (especially prior to de-regulation). It is important to the very scheme of market capitalism (making risk manageable). It's the reunuciation of that goal in the name of profit taking that disgusts me.
As for the mocking part, I am stunned to see someone who mocks me become angry at the return of derision. Politics is a game, JD, because neither of us is important (although you could be if you called the right people and gave the right donations). For me, though, I have beliefs and I need someone to discuss them with and, sometimes even, argue with. It's not serious to me.
Your twins, your daughter, my daughters, my son, wives and family and the Reds and Cards and Colts....those are important.
PS. One time on PW you bragged about going to a hole-in-the-wall Vietnamese restaurant. I asked you where it was (I love Asian food, but haven't really gotten to try much Vietnamese fare) and you never responded. I figured one of two things: 1) you didn't see my request or 2) you saw it and, discreetly, decided you didn't want me near a place that was important to you. Either one was fine (although by remembering it, I guess it did bother me some) and still is, but it's one reason I never thought you were overly serious about the other stuff.
PPS forgive any spelling errors above. The boss is moving me to a computer and I haven't had time to set up firefox.
PPPS There is a fabulous South Asian grovery store complex on the West side near Lafayette and 38th. If you ever want a fine buffet followed by some shady looking jewelry shopping, let me know.
Seriously, the way the dude has the jewelry stand set up...it looks like a scene from any Hollywood thriller set in Bombay.
I was not bragging. Egg Roll #1. South of 465 on Emerson. Pho xe lua with ba ving hung. It is probably not on the menu, but find the oldest person working there, and they will know what it is.
The place near 38th & Lafayette is where we buy our rice, in those huge bags. That place is interesting. Does the guy still work there that yells really loud when he talks? He charges me more because I am white, just figured that out last time I was there.
The places in Chicago, Houston, and LA are similar, though on a bigger scale. We bought my better half's engagement ring, in cash, at a place and it appraised for almost 5X what we paid. The Vietnamese grocery stores in Chicago and Houston almost all have jewelry stores in the back, as they are fanatical about diamonds.
I no longer have twins. One did not make it.
I have repeatedly told you that I handle litigated public, employments, and CGL lawsuits for the carrier. Never have I claimed to be a lawyer, though at times I wonder if I know as much law as the attorneys I retain daily. You obviously took that to mean I was a lawyer, which I realized after the JAG comment. If I allowed your mistake to linger without correction, that is my fault, but it is an erroneous conclusion you jumped to. P.S. In depositions, those kinds of assumptions will kill you.
JD is my real name.
timmy - I have to admit, it is scary when amongst a group of people, you are more rationale than all of your other compatriots combined. todd mayo and Prof. Murtha are waaaaaaaaaaaay outside the mainstream.
Post a Comment