Bush gives new reason for Iraq war: Protecting oil reserves

[mrmom2]

President Bush answered growing antiwar protests yesterday with a fresh reason for US troops to continue fighting in Iraq: protection of the country's vast oil fields, which he said would otherwise fall under the control of terrorist extremists, the AP reported Wednesday via the (registration-restricted) Boston Globe. Excerpts...

The president, standing against a backdrop of the USS Ronald Reagan, the newest aircraft carrier in the Navy's fleet, said terrorists would be denied their goal of making Iraq a base from which to recruit followers, train them, and finance attacks.

''We will defeat the terrorists," Bush said. ''We will build a free Iraq that will fight terrorists instead of giving them aid and sanctuary."

Appearing at Naval Air Station North Island to commemorate the anniversary of the Allies' World War II victory over Japan, Bush compared his resolve to President Franklin D. Roosevelt's in the 1940s and said America's mission in Iraq is to turn it into a democratic ally just as the United States did with Japan after its 1945 surrender. Bush's V-J Day ceremony did not fall on the actual anniversary. Japan announced its surrender on Aug. 15, 1945 -- Aug. 14 in the United States because of the time difference.

Democrats said Bush's leadership falls far short of Roosevelt's.

''Democratic Presidents Roosevelt and Truman led America to victory in World War II because they laid out a clear plan for success to the American people, America's allies, and America's troops," said Howard Dean, Democratic Party chairman. ''President Bush has failed to put together a plan, so despite the bravery and sacrifice of our troops, we are not making the progress that we should be in Iraq. The troops, our allies, and the American people deserve better leadership from our commander in chief."


Now its about protecting the oil 8O Not WMD or bringing democracy US foriegn policy is fast becoming the joke of the world under Bush's leadership

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: Bush gives new reason

He's edging closer to the truth...the war was all about oil. He's not telling the whole truth yet though. The invasion was never about using the oil for the good of the Iraqi people, or even the American people. It was, and is still, about making his corporate buddies rich while keeping as many resources as possible from potential competitors on the international stage.

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Re: Bush gives new reason for Iraq war: Protecting oil reser

September 1, 2005

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
-- George Santayana


"Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past."
-- George Orwell


"Want some wood?"
-- George W. Bush

Chuck Hagel, a decorated Vietnam War veteran who also happens to be a Republican, has put into words what the nation needs to hear but his Democratic colleagues are too frightened to say. "'Stay the course' is not a policy," the Nebraska Senator recently told ABC News. "When you analyze two and a half years in Iraq where we have put in over a third of a trillion dollars, where we have lost over 1,900 Americans, over 14,000 wounded, [you see] electricity production down, oil production down. By any measurement, any standard you apply to this, we're not winning ... we are locked into a bogged down problem, not dissimilar to where we were in Vietnam."

Though he wore a uniform during the Vietnam War, George W. Bush was not cut out for the rigors and sacrifices required of military life, in peace or war, on home front or front lines. Vietnam may as well have been Venus to him. He was just in it for the poontang and the picture-posing next to the big shiny jet ... vroom vroom . When he's now asked about his disgraceful military record, Bush seems genuinely baffled that anyone would question his right to come and go as he wanted back then, even as the expense and time the government spent training him to fly fighter jets -- during a time of war, no less -- was wasted. So, of course, he didn't learn the lessons of Vietnam, as Hagel did; of course, his blithering mumbled catch phrases seem an adequate way to explain his psychopathic war policy.

Indeed, in Idaho this week -- taking a vacation from his vacation -- Bush said, "Democracy is unfolding. We cannot tolerate the status quo." Does he even know what is coming out of his mouth any more? After his grueling 10-minute chat with the press, Bush then went for a bike ride, caught some fish and drove a pick up truck over dusty backroads.

Let me take it a step further and suggest the parallels are much more obvious than Hagel hints, especially in the final nightmare years of Vietnam.

­ Each had a paranoiac imperial president (Nixon, Bush) surrounded by sycophants and dirty tricksters who loathed the press.

­ Each president initially "won" election by, at best, dubious margins. Nixon won in 1968 with 43.4 percent of the vote vs. 43 percent for Humphrey, while only 23 percent of the eligible voters went to the polls. Bush, of course, is the Ultimate Asterisk. He was not elected by the people but selected by the Supreme Court after losing the popular vote by 504,000.

­ Each administration featured a corrupt, malevolent, lying, money-grubbing vice president who aimed to divide Americans against themselves (Spiro Agnew, Cheney).

­ Each featured attorney generals who bent the law to suit political needs (John Mitchell; both John Ashcroft and Alberto Gonzalez).

­ Each administration severely curtailed civil liberties in the name of national security. Nixon's FBI -- controlled by one of the most powerful men in American history, J. Edgar Hoover -- aggressively pursued and in some cases murdered militants and other dissenters under the Cointelpro program; Bush's henchmen use the USA Patriot Act and the newly formed Homeland Security Department -- the largest bureaucracy in American history -- to do roughly the same thing.

­ Nixon needlessly, pointlessly and tragically expanded the Vietnam War by bombing Cambodia, the fallout from which we are still facing; Bush preemptively attacked Iraq as part of his open-ended "war on terror," and Americans will face the consequences of this horrifically stupid action-- which millions of Americans loudly protested long before the bullets flew -- long after we're all pushing daisies.

­ Nixon was felled by Watergate, a cheesy, stupid crime that led to an even more criminal coverup; Bush will be felled by Iraq-nam.

one of the first measures taken in this invasion was to "protect the oil reserves..." (translated: US gains control over them -- or tries to ) "they" secured the oil reserves before they secured any hospitals etc ( the humanitarian elements in Iraq)

 

[JomZ]

RE: Bush gives new reason for Iraq war: Protecting oil reser

Is it too late, is the U.S. too far into this to even bother lying about the reasons for being in Iraq?

Is this war nothing more then a place to give U.S. Troops and terrorists or insurgents a chance to clash in combat, rather then another 9/11?

Are the American's so ingrained in this mentality that they have to control everything, that they will risk it all at the throw of the dice?

The answer is yes, I know Bush is a moron, but there has to be hundreds of people involved in the planning and orchestrating of this war that are willing to deal with the devil and risk America's soul.

Another question for all of you out there. Will America ever recover, or are they doomed to a Rome like collapse?
I guess we have to wait and see.

 

[no1important]

RE: Bush gives new reason

Do you think they will try to get a "seat" on OPEC? Is that part of their hidden agenda as well maybe? After all control of oil is what "W" wants.

 

[mrmom2]

Re: Bush gives new reason for Iraq war: Protecting oil reser

Unless they reinstate there constitution there going to burn like Rome sooner rather than later

 

[JomZ]

RE: Bush gives new reason for Iraq war: Protecting oil reser

So, are we heading to another Dark Ages, a total reversal in the progress of Humanity to a more savage state>

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Re: RE: Bush gives new reason for Iraq war: Protecting oil r

So, are we heading to another Dark Ages, a total reversal in the progress of Humanity to a more savage state>

Nope, Don't think so...... unless the rest of the world succumbs to the US "will" ......and allows the US to take it down with it. Does not mean the rest of the world will not be affected ......dramatically. It is already.

the path of self destruction is there and accelerating far too fast now. It can be averted with brand new leadership that is wise, mature, politically skilled and prepared to modify many of the current US policies. It is the US that must make the most changes now..... to get things back on a more sane keel. --not the rest of the world......as they in their deluded minds still tend to "believe".

 

[mrmom2]

Re: Bush gives new reason for Iraq war: Protecting oil reser

I don't know JomZ but ya got toadmit things are not looking good for the old USA the country is mired in a war it can't win has a criminal organization running it ,And is bankrupt

 

[JomZ]

RE: Bush gives new reason for Iraq war: Protecting oil reser

I maybe being to poetic in my last posts.

But are their leaders like that in the U.S. that embody these types of principals. I know the most politically astute are usually lost to the more colourful characters that emerge (War Heroes, Ex-president's sons, former Vice presidents).

Im sure their are a few out there with the tact and skill to be good Presidents. Unfortunately, most don't go for it because they know what they are in for. So are we then left with the remedial politicians?

 

[JomZ]

RE: Bush gives new reason for Iraq war: Protecting oil reser

Its kind of Ironic, America bankrupts itself to fight its was on terror, when Mother Nature can come along and do more damage in one day then a terrorist cell could wish to do in a life time.

 

[mrmom2]

Re: Bush gives new reason for Iraq war: Protecting oil reser

Hey Jom go read my post in New Orleans after Katrina this is a big part of whats wrong with the US 8O

 

[Ocean Breeze]

Re: Bush gives new reason for Iraq war: Protecting oil reser

things are not looking good for the old USA the country is mired in a war it can't win has a criminal organization running it ,And is bankrupt

no things ain't looking too good for the US at all now. They (the Criminals in Govt' ) have over extended themselves ......beyond realistic scope. Arrogance , does this and soon they are up to their necks in serious "shit".

Current status:

US very much out of favor with the rest of the world. (that is being kind)

It has overextended it's military ........and new recruits are getting harder to come by.

It is spending money like there is no tomorrow....in massive quantities. (and in debt - to the point of bankrupcy)----not bargaining from a position of strength anymore.

It has not come anywhere near getting some control over the "terrorist" issue....... while fostering more each day with their "policy" statements and interferences and LIES.

Afganistan is not fait accompli by any stretch of the imagination......and could easily erupt at any time.

Iraqnam.........is just that . Iraqnam. A bloody mess with a horror taking place almost every day. (last one killing almost a thousand Iraqis....... and all thanks to that fuckhead bush in washington. )

"mother nature" is presenting evidence that "we have not been all that kind to our environment.........and the US being the biggest abuser of things material and expedient contributs to the global warming , while trying to claim it does not exist. ( what kind of "intelligence" is that??)


yep.......and those are only a few of the current HOT issues plaguing the "good ol'; US of A. ..........and notice how the rest of the world is WATCHING every move, every word that bush utters.......and preparing for the unknown /unpredictable knee jerk cowboy reactions from an ill equipped person to run a country........ that used to be as fine as the US WAR.......


So , yes, it would seem that the good ol' US of A is in some serious shit now. Just maybe THIS time.....it will not be so easily resolved ......in the standard arrogant US style.