A - these are motives that once DID exist in the top ranks of the now ruling conservative government, as proven. Did they stop existing the very day GWB became president?
B - these are motives that are now being carried out with the highest priority (oil fields were the first thing that got secured over there).
So what you're suggesting is that these factors weren't the primary reason for invasion, but only a welcome bonus, next to the quest of fighting terrorism. ('fighting terrorism', of course, isn't even HALF as proven as the oil post I posted above).
You're suggesting that they let their mission for oil go when they (and by 'they' I mean the dudes who stated US hegemony over the world is a top priority, the dudes who somehow all got into the Bush administration together) got into the White House.
Let's look more into the PNAC. This is an organisation that stated VERY clearly that one of the top priorities was access to oil in the Middle East, now (although they don't call it that in the media anymore) and before the current government(2000). Some of the functions they got:
- Representative for Middle Eastern Affairs
- Deputy Secretary of State
- Current nominee for U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations
- Vice President
- Director of the International Broadcasting Bureau
- Undersecretary of State for Global Affairs
- President of U.S. Committee on NATO
- Ambassador of U.S.-Afghanistan Embassy in Kabul
- Chief of Staff for the Vice President
- Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security
- Secretary of Defense
- President of the World Bank
- Comptroller of Department of Defense
- U.S. Trade Representative
- MORE!
These were all members of the PNAC before the 2000 presidential election. In 1998, these were the
exact - same - people who urged Clinton to overthrow Hussein and seize control over the Iraq oil fields.
Seriously, read that again.
So in review, we have a group of people who made it NO secret (and even put it on their website) that very high on the agenda was the control over the Iraqi oil fields. Post-election, an insane line-up of these people are assigned some of the most important functions in the US government possible. Anno 2000, the White House is literally *riddled* with these people.
2001, 4 terrorist attacks take place on US-soil. Strangely, the White House sees a link to the Middle East that warrants an invasion "for which they'll provide proof later". Does anyone actually know?
Yes, as did the other 200+ countries that had nothing to do with WMDs and terrorism. The Netherlands are suspiciously quiet - why not attack them?
No you haven't. Most hasn't been pumped at all. I can guess though who'll get the first turn at the pump of the last big, known, cheap oil fields of this planet.
If you recall since the 50s to the early 70s, US and UK oil companies virtually monopolized Middle East oil production and distribution. That was the seven sisters; 5 US and two UK (BP and Shell). The French and Italian were shut out while Germany never got a chance to put up its own global oil companies.
This explains the unqualified support of the US Iraq invasion by Britain--to the extent of Tony Blair lying outright.
If you reply to this, more beef to your post please... I was in doubt if I wanted to write this up, cause the distribution of work doesn't seem fair
![;)](../../smileys/wink.gif)