Greenspan: 'Iraq War Largely about OIL'

[disrupter]

Alan Greenspan claims Iraq war was really for oil
“I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil,” he says.http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article2461214.ece

[Smurf-Herder]

That's pretty misleading, considering the article also says:

"Greenspan, 81, is understood to believe that Saddam Hussein posed a threat to the security of oil supplies in the Middle East."

Everything about Saddam (WMD, etc.) sprang from this basic concept - that Saddam was a continuing threat to the world's access to Middle Eastern oil.

[Linkster]

So your belief would be that middle east countries are "required" to sell their oil to all that demand it? You obviously live in a sheltered world - any soveriegn nation can decide what it wants to do with its natural resources - if the Iraqis wanted to horde it all - or even sell it to China - then that is their choice - not the United States peoples choice.

[Smurf-Herder]

So your belief would be that middle east countries are "required" to sell their oil to all that demand it? You obviously live in a sheltered world - any soveriegn nation can decide what it wants to do with its natural resources - if the Iraqis wanted to horde it all - or even sell it to China - then that is their choice - not the United States peoples choice.

No.

Saddam was a threat to Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and the smaller Gulf countries.

[mwillman]

He was a threat in 1990 but he was not a threat in 2003.

The easy with which we were able to topple his regime proves that. He had no WMD's his millitary was devestated in the first gulf war. He was an emperor with no cloths and we invaded to gain control of the Oil in Iraq not to protect the rest of the Arab nations.

In fact I would go as far as to say that they are in more danger now with Iran gaining so much influence in the region.

[Linkster]

No.

Saddam was a threat to Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and the smaller Gulf countries.

I really dont understand where the idea that he was a threat to these countries comes from - he was doing a good job making sure that Iran was not a threat, and had so many UN people looking down his back he wouldnt have had the ability, much less the resources to do anything to a smaller country - the US still had CAP patrols going over Iraq constantly off the carriers and out of Saudi - it would have been impossible for him to mount much of anything

[Smurf-Herder]

I really dont understand where the idea that he was a threat to these countries comes from - he was doing a good job making sure that Iran was not a threat, and had so many UN people looking down his back he wouldnt have had the ability, much less the resources to do anything to a smaller country - the US still had CAP patrols going over Iraq constantly off the carriers and out of Saudi - it would have been impossible for him to mount much of anything

Yet he tried twice during Clinton's term. And other countries were pushing to lift sanctions, because of the effects on the Iraqi people ... while he pocketed billions from the Oil For Food Scam.

He has a continuing threat, as long as he was in power.

How many decades would you have kept US troops in Saudi Arabia? ... while Al-Qaeda used it as a reason to attack us.

[mwillman]

Calling Iraq a threat to america is like calling a mouse a threat to an Elephant.

The point is that we as a nation should not be acting like an Empire. We are not perfect and have no right to dictate to other nations what they should and shouldnt do. We can disagree and not trade with other nations but acting like we are superior does nothing except generate hate for us.

We are lucky to have all the recources that we have. Which to a large degree is why we are so powerfull. Its not becuase we are somehow better then anyone else.

[Linkster]

Yet he tried twice during Clinton's term. And other countries were pushing to lift sanctions, because of the effects on the Iraqi people ... while he pocketed billions from the Oil For Food Scam.

He has a continuing threat, as long as he was in power.

How many decades would you have kept US troops in Saudi Arabia? ... while Al-Qaeda used it as a reason to attack us.

Could you post some proof of that two attempts he made please - this is the first time Ive heard of any military moves by him during Clintons terms - would be interesting to see

Guess we shouldnt have put him in power eh? Should have left that nice democracy they had before we helped him come to power

As far as Saudi - we had an agreement with Saudi Arabia from 1990 to keep US troops there until 2003 - and we honored that agreement and pulled them out in 2003 - as far as Al Qaeda - since they were primarily based out of Saudi Arabia I would say that really wasnt the reason - although I just have the words preached by Bin Laden and his followers to base that on and some knowledge of how Al Qaeda (which really wasnt their name at the time) came to be through the efforts of the CIA and the first G Bush - but Im sure that you wouldnt be interested in that story

[Linkster]

I suppose I should also ask the question what what you meant by the pocketing of billions from the oil-for-food "scam"? Best I can tell the Central Bank that was holding the money still has most of it - and was doling it out for humanitarian aid - it was all run by the UN under a resolution and there really wasnt anything that he could have "pocketed" as there was no direct money given to Iraq- it was all supplies and equipment to the tune of about $28 billion - I do seem to remember a few UN leaders that pocketed some kickbacks from the oil sales although that was after the oil left Iraq

I hope you werent referring to any propaganda that the president used during his justification for war as we are all aware that was all just made up stuff that sounded good and most of us here know better

[Smurf-Herder]

Calling Iraq a threat to america is like calling a mouse a threat to an Elephant.

The point is that we as a nation should not be acting like an Empire. We are not perfect and have no right to dictate to other nations what they should and shouldnt do. We can disagree and not trade with other nations but acting like we are superior does nothing except generate hate for us.

We are lucky to have all the recources that we have. Which to a large degree is why we are so powerfull. Its not becuase we are somehow better then anyone else.

Iraq was a threat to all it's neighbors; and in that respect, a threat to the economic security of the US and the developed countries that rely on middle eastern oil.

[Linkster]

Again I will ask - could you post some proof that there was any threat to Iraqs neighbors other than either left or right wing nutcase articles please

I would also still be interested in how Iraq was going to affect the US's economic security - if you mean that the US wouldnt get its oil - they werent going to anyway - it was already spoken for by the UN - in a resolution that the US voted yes for

[moonman]

That's pretty misleading, considering the article also says:

"Greenspan, 81, is understood to believe that Saddam Hussein posed a threat to the security of oil supplies in the Middle East."

Everything about Saddam (WMD, etc.) sprang from this basic concept - that Saddam was a continuing threat to the world's access to Middle Eastern oil.

It never ceases to amaze how Bush supporters will move the goalposts everytime Bush is caught lying us into war in Iraq. It's a brilliant political strategy that merely requires a total lack of integrity and honor to execute.

Let me get this one straight. Smerf-hurder posts that Hussein was a threat to our access to M.E. oil. Further on this thread Smerf-hurder alleges Hussein was so desperate for money that he engaged in an oil for food scam whereby he skirted sanctions and actually put more oil on the market than he was to be permitted.

Hussein's actions contributed to holding oil prices down by increasing supply

:lmao2: :lmao2: :lmao2: :lmao2: @Smerf-hurder.

[Smurf-Herder]

I suppose I should also ask the question what what you meant by the pocketing of billions from the oil-for-food "scam"? Best I can tell the Central Bank that was holding the money still has most of it - and was doling it out for humanitarian aid - it was all run by the UN under a resolution and there really wasnt anything that he could have "pocketed" as there was no direct money given to Iraq- it was all supplies and equipment to the tune of about $28 billion - I do seem to remember a few UN leaders that pocketed some kickbacks from the oil sales although that was after the oil left Iraq

I hope you werent referring to any propaganda that the president used during his justification for war as we are all aware that was all just made up stuff that sounded good and most of us here know better

Scope of oil-for-food fraud 'overwhelming'
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-11-17-oil-for-food_x.htm

[Linkster]

Do you happen to read what you post? That scandal was about US companies (BayOil etc) who were caught doing illegal transactions with the UN and have criminal charges actually pending, as well as many other countries


The $64 billion oil-for-food program operated under U.N. oversight from 1996 to 2003. According to the Volcker report, it attracted a large and unusual cast of participants, from Australian wheat farmers to Russian politicians, former French diplomats, U.S. oilmen and Iranian terrorists.

It ended up tarnishing the UN itself because Annans son was involved as well

[moonman]

Scope of oil-for-food fraud 'overwhelming'
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-11-17-oil-for-food_x.htm

:lmao2: :lmao2: :lmao2: :lmao2: @ Smurf-herder.

Oil for food actually did the exact opposite of your claim that "Hussein was a continuing threat to our access to Middle East oil."

First putting more oil on the market than what was anticipated to be on the market held down prices and INCREASED our access to the oil because more of the oil became available.

megaDuh @Smurf-herder.

Anybody catch Carlin on HBO last night? I think he was talking about Smurf-herder in his bit on voting.

[disrupter]

if he is a threat to oil supplies, that is still about OIL.

What part of oil isn't about oil?

now we know why you are a smurf herder,
you weren't competent for anything better.

incompetent? are you must work for the neoconmen. yes?

misleading?

yes.

YOU are attempting to mislead people.

[Smurf-Herder]

Could you post some proof of that two attempts he made please - this is the first time Ive heard of any military moves by him during Clintons terms - would be interesting to see

Guess we shouldnt have put him in power eh? Should have left that nice democracy they had before we helped him come to power

As far as Saudi - we had an agreement with Saudi Arabia from 1990 to keep US troops there until 2003 - and we honored that agreement and pulled them out in 2003 - as far as Al Qaeda - since they were primarily based out of Saudi Arabia I would say that really wasnt the reason - although I just have the words preached by Bin Laden and his followers to base that on and some knowledge of how Al Qaeda (which really wasnt their name at the time) came to be through the efforts of the CIA and the first G Bush - but Im sure that you wouldnt be interested in that story

IRAQI TROOPS MASS AT BORDER CLINTON ORDERS NORFOLK CARRIER TO THE RED SEA THREAT TO KUWAIT LIKELY TIED TO SANCTIONS ISSUE
http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/VA-news/VA-Pilot/issues/1994/vp941008/10080302.htm

http://www.answers.com/topic/iraq-disarmament-crisis-timeline-1990-1996

"January, 1993

Iraq refuses to allow UNSCOM to use its own aircraft to fly into Iraq. Iraq also starts military incursions into the demilitarized zone between Iraq and Kuwait and increases its military activity in the northern and southern No-Fly Zones."

"September-October, 1994

Iraq threatens to stop cooperating with UNSCOM inspectors and begins once again deploying troops near the Kuwait border. In response, the US begins to deploy troops to Kuwait. Code-named Operation Vigilant Warrior, 1st Brigade of the Fort Stewart, Georgia based 24th Infantry Division (Mechanized) deployed and drew pre-positioned equipment in Kuwait."

We helped the Baathists come to power in 1963. Saddam personally came to power in '79.

[Smurf-Herder]

Do you happen to read what you post? That scandal was about US companies (BayOil etc) who were caught doing illegal transactions with the UN and have criminal charges actually pending, as well as many other countries


The $64 billion oil-for-food program operated under U.N. oversight from 1996 to 2003. According to the Volcker report, it attracted a large and unusual cast of participants, from Australian wheat farmers to Russian politicians, former French diplomats, U.S. oilmen and Iranian terrorists.

It ended up tarnishing the UN itself because Annans son was involved as well


Yeah, I read it ... so?

[disrupter]

next smufie will be claiming Saddam had WMDs.

Where do these paid liars ever get off?

[Linkster]

"U.S. officials said the troop deployments, the most threatening moves Iraq has taken since the Persian Gulf war, were probably a bluff intended to encourage the United Nations Security Council to lift economic sanctions imposed after Iraq invaded Kuwait in August 1990."

[Bill]

Shame the republicans are so bad at war that they still don't have the oil.

It's like watching one of those heist-gone-wrong comedies.

[disrupter]

keystone cops, anyone?

reality check.
Bechtel, Halliburton, Blackwater have profited hansomely, grossly from this fiasco for America.

So ask yourself, what is REALLY driving policy?