What is your point? People on this thread, in fact people all over the world have been detailing ad nauseum the role of oil in this manufactured crisis.
atimes.com
"The Future of Iraq Group, a State Department task force, officially is not talking about oil - which sounds like a joke. And there's also no official confirmation that oil has been a key issue in the current hardcore Security Council negotiations between the US and Britain, on one side, and France, Russia and China on the other. But it is obviously not by historical accident that oil companies from these five permanent Security Council members are all positioning themselves for the post-Saddam environment.
People like former CIA supremo James Woolsey are not even disguising Washington's plan to turn Iraq into an American protectorate with an Arab Hamid Karzai al-la Afghanistan eager to open the oil taps for American oil giants. Woolsey had been openly saying that if France and Russia contributed to "regime change", their oil companies would be able to "work together" with the new regime and with American companies. Otherwise, they would be left contemplating passing cargoes in the Gulf."
This has been rehashed on this thread endlessly. As in frequently.
energyintel.com
energyintel.com
energyintel.com
These are some of the many, many, many news and analytical pieces that have been discussed or alluded to here. All deal with the lure of oil. With the Bush administration, that lure is, shall we say, more brazen.
M2 |
