PDA

View Full Version : The Mission WAS Accomplished



FORD
03-21-2006, 05:08 PM
Bush Didn't Bungle Iraq, You Fools
THE MISSION WAS INDEED ACCOMPLISHED
The Guardian
Monday, March 20, 2006
by Greg Palast

Get off it. All the carping, belly-aching and complaining about George Bush's incompetence in Iraq, from both the Left and now the Right, is just dead wrong.

On the third anniversary of the tanks rolling over Iraq's border, most of the 59 million Homer Simpsons who voted for Bush are beginning to doubt if his mission was accomplished.

But don't kid yourself -- Bush and his co-conspirator, Dick Cheney, accomplished exactly what they set out to do. In case you've forgotten what their real mission was, let me remind you of White House spokesman Ari Fleisher's original announcement, three years ago, launching of what he called,

"Operation

Iraqi

Liberation."

O.I.L. How droll of them, how cute. Then, Karl Rove made the giggling boys in the White House change it to "OIF" -- Operation Iraqi Freedom. But the 101st Airborne wasn't sent to Basra to get its hands on Iraq's OIF.

"It's about oil," Robert Ebel told me. Who is Ebel? Formerly the CIA's top oil analyst, he was sent by the Pentagon, about a month before the invasion, to a secret confab in London with Saddam's former oil minister to finalize the plans for "liberating" Iraq's oil industry. In London, Bush's emissary Ebel also instructed Ibrahim Bahr al-Ulum, the man the Pentagon would choose as post-OIF oil minister for Iraq, on the correct method of disposing Iraq's crude.

And what did the USA want Iraq to do with Iraq's oil? The answer will surprise many of you: and it is uglier, more twisted, devilish and devious than anything imagined by the most conspiracy-addicted blogger. The answer can be found in a 323-page plan for Iraq's oil secretly drafted by the State Department. Our team got a hold of a copy; how, doesn't matter. The key thing is what's inside this thick Bush diktat: a directive to Iraqis to maintain a state oil company that will "enhance its relationship with OPEC."

Enhance its relationship with OPEC??? How strange: the government of the United States ordering Iraq to support the very OPEC oil cartel which is strangling our nation with outrageously high prices for crude.

Specifically, the system ordered up by the Bush cabal would keep a lid on Iraq's oil production -- limiting Iraq's oil pumping to the tight quota set by Saudi Arabia and the OPEC cartel.

There you have it. Yes, Bush went in for the oil -- not to get more of Iraq's oil, but to prevent Iraq producing too much of it.

You must keep in mind who paid for George's ranch and Dick's bunker: Big Oil. And Big Oil -- and their buck-buddies, the Saudis -- don't make money from pumping more oil, but from pumping less of it. The lower the supply, the higher the price.

It's Economics 101. The oil industry is run by a cartel, OPEC, and what economists call an "oligopoly" -- a tiny handful of operators who make more money when there's less oil, not more of it. So, every time the "insurgents" blow up a pipeline in Basra, every time Mad Mahmoud in Tehran threatens to cut supply, the price of oil leaps. And Dick and George just love it.

Dick and George didn't want more oil from Iraq, they wanted less. I know some of you, no matter what I write, insist that our President and his Veep are on the hunt for more crude so you can cheaply fill your family Hummer; that somehow, these two oil-patch babies are concerned that the price of gas in the USA is bumping up to $3 a gallon.

Not so, gentle souls. Three bucks a gallon in the States (and a quid a litre in Britain) means colossal profits for Big Oil, and that makes Dick's ticker go pitty-pat with joy. The top oily-gopolists, the five largest oil companies, pulled in $113 billion in profit in 2005 -- compared to a piddly $34 billion in 2002 before Operation Iraqi Liberation. In other words, it's been a good war for Big Oil.

As per Plan Bush, Bahr Al-Ulum became Iraq's occupation oil minister; the conquered nation "enhanced its relationship with OPEC;" and the price of oil, from Clinton peace-time to Bush war-time, shot up 317%.

In other words, on the third anniversary of invasion, we can say the attack and occupation is, indeed, a Mission Accomplished. However, it wasn't America's mission, nor the Iraqis'. It was a Mission Accomplished for OPEC and Big Oil.

Nitro Express
03-21-2006, 05:27 PM
I always thought along the same lines. You are talking record corporate profits for big oil thank to the Iraq war. It's hard to think Rumsfeld and Chenney were stupid enough to think they could invade Iraq without causing a massive insurgency and civil war. Taking Saddam out destabalized the region and took Saddam's oil out of the international market place.

Saddam was all about bartering or selling oil and he was the biggest enemy of OPEC and Big Oil. Now with him gone they can reduce what comes out of the region and if a civil war, or Iran makes the supply even less, so be it because that means higher oil prices.

Brazil told OPEC and big oil to fuck off by developing sugar cane produced ethanol and an infastructer to use it. Brazil is almost 100% oil independant.

Guitar Shark
03-21-2006, 05:29 PM
Who is this Greg Palast guy?

Nickdfresh
03-21-2006, 05:37 PM
Originally posted by Guitar Shark
Who is this Greg Palast guy?

I'm not sure, but I think he writes articles for The GUARDIAN...

And this does stink to high hell, the record-profits while crying "free market." Market-oligopolies are anything but "free." I think there is much validity here...

*Edit* Ha! http://www.gregpalast.com/

FORD
03-21-2006, 05:55 PM
Originally posted by Guitar Shark
Who is this Greg Palast guy?

Greg Palast is one of the last true investigative journalists on this planet. He's American, but he works in London, because no American paper would let him do his job.

Palast is the guy who exposed the massive fraud in Florida in 2000, i.e. all the shit Jeb & Cruella Harris did before election day with the Choice Point database software which purged thousands from the Florida voter rolls.

I recommend his book "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy".

ODShowtime
03-21-2006, 08:48 PM
Oh well, what can you do? American Idol is on anyway...

Cathedral
03-21-2006, 11:28 PM
Originally posted by FORD
Bush Didn't Bungle Iraq, You Fools
THE MISSION WAS INDEED ACCOMPLISHED
The Guardian
Monday, March 20, 2006
by Greg Palast

Get off it. All the carping, belly-aching and complaining about George Bush's incompetence in Iraq, from both the Left and now the Right, is just dead wrong.

On the third anniversary of the tanks rolling over Iraq's border, most of the 59 million Homer Simpsons who voted for Bush are beginning to doubt if his mission was accomplished.

But don't kid yourself -- Bush and his co-conspirator, Dick Cheney, accomplished exactly what they set out to do. In case you've forgotten what their real mission was, let me remind you of White House spokesman Ari Fleisher's original announcement, three years ago, launching of what he called,

"Operation

Iraqi

Liberation."

O.I.L. How droll of them, how cute. Then, Karl Rove made the giggling boys in the White House change it to "OIF" -- Operation Iraqi Freedom. But the 101st Airborne wasn't sent to Basra to get its hands on Iraq's OIF.

"It's about oil," Robert Ebel told me. Who is Ebel? Formerly the CIA's top oil analyst, he was sent by the Pentagon, about a month before the invasion, to a secret confab in London with Saddam's former oil minister to finalize the plans for "liberating" Iraq's oil industry. In London, Bush's emissary Ebel also instructed Ibrahim Bahr al-Ulum, the man the Pentagon would choose as post-OIF oil minister for Iraq, on the correct method of disposing Iraq's crude.

And what did the USA want Iraq to do with Iraq's oil? The answer will surprise many of you: and it is uglier, more twisted, devilish and devious than anything imagined by the most conspiracy-addicted blogger. The answer can be found in a 323-page plan for Iraq's oil secretly drafted by the State Department. Our team got a hold of a copy; how, doesn't matter. The key thing is what's inside this thick Bush diktat: a directive to Iraqis to maintain a state oil company that will "enhance its relationship with OPEC."

Enhance its relationship with OPEC??? How strange: the government of the United States ordering Iraq to support the very OPEC oil cartel which is strangling our nation with outrageously high prices for crude.

Specifically, the system ordered up by the Bush cabal would keep a lid on Iraq's oil production -- limiting Iraq's oil pumping to the tight quota set by Saudi Arabia and the OPEC cartel.

There you have it. Yes, Bush went in for the oil -- not to get more of Iraq's oil, but to prevent Iraq producing too much of it.

You must keep in mind who paid for George's ranch and Dick's bunker: Big Oil. And Big Oil -- and their buck-buddies, the Saudis -- don't make money from pumping more oil, but from pumping less of it. The lower the supply, the higher the price.

It's Economics 101. The oil industry is run by a cartel, OPEC, and what economists call an "oligopoly" -- a tiny handful of operators who make more money when there's less oil, not more of it. So, every time the "insurgents" blow up a pipeline in Basra, every time Mad Mahmoud in Tehran threatens to cut supply, the price of oil leaps. And Dick and George just love it.

Dick and George didn't want more oil from Iraq, they wanted less. I know some of you, no matter what I write, insist that our President and his Veep are on the hunt for more crude so you can cheaply fill your family Hummer; that somehow, these two oil-patch babies are concerned that the price of gas in the USA is bumping up to $3 a gallon.

Not so, gentle souls. Three bucks a gallon in the States (and a quid a litre in Britain) means colossal profits for Big Oil, and that makes Dick's ticker go pitty-pat with joy. The top oily-gopolists, the five largest oil companies, pulled in $113 billion in profit in 2005 -- compared to a piddly $34 billion in 2002 before Operation Iraqi Liberation. In other words, it's been a good war for Big Oil.

As per Plan Bush, Bahr Al-Ulum became Iraq's occupation oil minister; the conquered nation "enhanced its relationship with OPEC;" and the price of oil, from Clinton peace-time to Bush war-time, shot up 317%.

In other words, on the third anniversary of invasion, we can say the attack and occupation is, indeed, a Mission Accomplished. However, it wasn't America's mission, nor the Iraqis'. It was a Mission Accomplished for OPEC and Big Oil.

My silence means i don't know what to think anymore.
Bush and Cheney are making money off this war which is a conflict of interest in my opinion.
But they are indirectly if not directly on the profiting end of what has transpired.

Again, I am without a solid rebuttle, so i'll leave it at that for now.

Though i would really really really like NOT to belive it.
The argument does hold water.

DLR'sCock
03-22-2006, 10:01 AM
yep........

Rikk
03-22-2006, 11:09 AM
That actually makes more sense than any other oil argument people have been making. The war has almost seemed like a confusing thing in terms of real reasons involving oil...

Remember GOLDFINGER? Sean Connery is confused as hell because Goldfinger is going to attack Fort Knox but old GF won't have time to take almost any gold out before the Army moves in. Ah, but GF's plan is not to steal all the gold...his plan is to destroy it and drive the price of gold up around the world, crippling the market...

Same basic concept. And it makes a lot more sense.

bueno bob
03-22-2006, 11:16 AM
Goldfinger was a grate movie...

But these are not grate times...

I'm actually very ashamed of my Government. Never thought I would be, but...

EAT MY ASSHOLE
03-22-2006, 11:18 AM
Not sure if I give this full creedence.

If you recall, at the beginning of "Shock and Awe", one of the chief concerns was making sure that the oil fields wouldn't be destroyed or corrupted by Saddam and/or future insurgents. How does that resolve with palast's argument?

Plus, why would Bush and Cheney want to drive up prices? The oil industry may be racking up record profits right now, but it's not like they were ever hurting in the least. What would be the point in making a few quick dollars now, in comparison to the eventual overall costs, both financial and mortal?

I respect Palast's work a great deal, but not sure if this makes all the sense in the world, regardless if Sean Connery-era James Bond analogies seem to fit.

Nickdfresh
03-22-2006, 12:47 PM
I have to say I particularly agree with EAT MY ASSHOLE here, but I do think there was something to this. It was a cash grab to some extent, but I think they Admin also anticipated more oil coming out of Iraq at this point, and they clearly didn't account for a stalemate with an intractable insurgency...

A lot of the IRAQ War had to do with getting sources of oil before CHINA did...

You see, if we were smart, and really wanted to invade people for oil while "liberating" the citizens, we would have gone into the SUDAN, of which CHINA deals with, and sells weapons too, despite a horrendous policy towards it' blacks that borders on genocide in Darfur...

Oh, and oh yeah, someone once actually lived there before he fled to Afghanistan...

BigBadBrian
03-22-2006, 03:54 PM
It DOES crack me up when Bush talks about alternative fuels or hybrid cars. Yeah, right. :rolleyes:

Even those statements don't hold any water with me.

:gulp:

ODShowtime
03-22-2006, 08:48 PM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
It DOES crack me up when Bush talks about alternative fuels or hybrid cars. Yeah, right. :rolleyes:

Even those statements don't hold any water with me.

That's nice. Another one admits that gw is a liar. We're making progress every day. :)

Nickdfresh
03-22-2006, 10:30 PM
Originally posted by BigBadBrian
It DOES crack me up when Bush talks about alternative fuels or hybrid cars. Yeah, right. :rolleyes:

Even those statements don't hold any water with me.

:gulp:

Well I'll give you credit for that at least...

It's like the Medein Cartel telling you you're addicted to cocaine, and should cut down...

Big Train
03-22-2006, 11:29 PM
To say that record oil profits aren't a demand driven issue is just silly. To ignore China's rising production capacity and it's voracious appetite for oil is dim. To roll it all together with the US war and say that is the sole reason for rising profits is stupid.

To imply that, you would also have to go with the obvious. Why is Halliburton Exxon etc not sabotaging corn fields with lye, damaging hydro electic, wind and solar energy farms as well? THAT would drive up demand and price for oil. C,mon, they are madmen right? They will stop at nothing right? They have already killed a million people right?

Well, I remain unconvinced. You could claim ignorance, but I claim the opposite. All these journalists, theorists, and nutjobs can't paint a realistic picture for how these guys are profiting from it. If you can find out all this other shit, tell me why you can't prove how they are profiting. Bush and Cheney aren't. Until someone can prove it, it's all clutching at straws.

I don't say that to defend Bush. I say that because I don't buy into these theories. Lack of proof is a primary reason.

FORD
03-23-2006, 01:36 AM
Originally posted by Big Train
Why is Halliburton Exxon etc not sabotaging corn fields with lye

Because Monsanto and Archer Daniels Midland are as close to the BCE as Exxon and Halliburton are.

Nitro Express
03-23-2006, 03:01 AM
The oil crisis of the 1970's just about shut down Brazil. The govt. was not going to be caught in that trap again and started a nationwide alternative fuel program. Brazil grows huge amounts of sugar cane in which they distill ethanol from. They have a whole distribution system set up that has taken 30 years to build. Brazil is almost 100% energy independant.

Iceland is shooting to be the first hydrogen powered nation.

China is making a huge mistake. They are building a huge infastructure based on oil. Why not an alternative fuel like hydrogen? China is copying the US and they will find they will have the same problems. China is blowing it just like the US blew it.

Brazil of all countries, got it right. If you are energy independant, nobody can screw with you. If you have to depend of foriegners to supply you energy, you are more vunerable.