Log in

View Full Version : Bush links war to oil



FeedmeWeed
03-26-2008, 02:30 AM
FARAH STOCKMAN; The Boston Globe
Published: March 20th, 2008 01:00 AM
WASHINGTON ?? On the fifth anniversary of the Iraq war, President Bush delivered a speech Wednesday at the Pentagon warning of ??serious consequences for the world??s economy? if the United States were to withdraw from Iraq and al-Qaida were to seize control of the country??s vast oil resources.

Later in the president??s speech, when addressing the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, Bush talked not only of the Americans who lost their lives, but of the large number who lost their jobs.

??More than a million Americans lost work? following the attacks, he said.

Bush??s speech, which otherwise dwelled on the importance of military victory, was a quiet attempt to link al-Qaida to America??s economic woes, some analysts noted.

??I think he??s trying to make a case that the Iraq war is integral to resolving our economic difficulties, which he knows the public is weighing more heavily now than they have in the past five years,? said Kenneth Katzman, a Middle East specialist with the Congressional Research Service, the research arm of Congress.

Anti-war protesters also sought to link the war to the economy by blockading the offices of the Internal Revenue Service to draw attention to the high cost of the conflict.

Bush, in his speech, contended that estimates of the war??s costs have been overblown. But he also acknowledged that the ??battle in Iraq has been longer and harder and more costly than we anticipated.?

He said security gains made by U.S. troops over the past year are ??fragile and reversible,? signaling that he is unlikely to order further troop reductions in Iraq beyond those already planned. He said the war, which has cost nearly 4,000 U.S. lives and roughly $500 billion in direct expenses, is poised to give the United States a major strategic victory against al-Qaida.

Bush did not distinguish between al-Qaida, the group started by Osama bin Laden, and al-Qaida in Iraq, the Sunni-based extremist group. A Pentagon-sponsored study of 600,000 Iraq documents, released last week, showed no link between Saddam Hussein and bin Laden.

Some of Bush??s strongest words were when he described what he said would be the consequences for pulling out of Iraq.

??An emboldened al-Qaida with access to Iraq??s oil resources could pursue its ambitions to acquire weapons of mass destruction to attack America and other free nations,? he said.

The argument that U.S. troops need to stay in Iraq to protect the country??s oil is not a new one. As far back as 2005, Bush warned that if bin Laden gained control of Iraq, his group would ??seize oil fields to fund their ambitions.?

But some specialists took issue Wednesday with the idea that al-Qaida in Iraq would get control of the country??s oil in the event of a U.S. withdrawal, because the oil is located in Shiite and Kurdish areas that are hostile to the group.

??The idea that al-Qaida is going to gain control over Iraq and export oil is a fairy tale, James Bond stuff,? said Ilan Goldenberg, policy director at the National Security Network, a liberal group of defense and foreign policy specialists.

Michael Makovsky, who served as special assistant on Iraqi oil in the office of the Secretary of Defense from 2002 to 2006, said criminal gangs and Shiite militias in southern Iraq pose a more significant threat to Iraqi oil exports than al-Qaida.

At the White House, Press Secretary Dana Perino said Bush??s remarks were meant to highlight the economic effects of a setback in the war on terror.

??We know what the kind of impact that the 9/11 attack had on our country,? she said. ??Our stock markets went into a turmoil, and we had to take significant action in order to help right our economy.?

Vice President Dick Cheney said separately that it does not matter whether the public supports the U.S. presence in Iraq.

After a reporter cited polls showing that two-thirds of Americans oppose the Iraq war, Cheney responded: ??So??

??I think you cannot be blown off course by the fluctuations in the public opinion polls,? he said while in Oman.

In an interview with ABC News, Cheney compared the Bush administration??s task in Iraq to Lincoln??s determination during the Civil War.

When asked whether he cares what Americans think of the war, Cheney answered ??no.?

Bush links war to oil | TheNewsTribune.com | Tacoma, WA (http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/nationworld/story/313585.html)

Psycho4Bud
03-26-2008, 10:28 AM
Saddam had no problem selling oil to Syria during the "Food for Oil" program. Why wouldn't a group that Syria backs?

Have a good one!:s4:

Rusty Trichome
03-26-2008, 01:38 PM
Gotta love these cut-n-paste heros. So individualistic, they can't even form a few sentences to express individual thought. Where have your "question authority" morals gone, when you consistently cut-n-paste thoughts from those liberals that do the thinking for you, and tell you where your anger lies today.
I guess it's tough being an individual, when y'all are just another blinded sheep in the flock of discontent.

No comments in regards to the articles' content, no intelligent analysis of facts, just taking someone elses work, and two clicks later, they are your deepest heartfelt thoughts. Lazy and lacking any form of higher thinking.

Amazing how this all works.

So, since there is often no evidence to the contrary, I'm led to believe this is the depth and breadth of the liberal thought processes, (yes master...cut-n-paste...must cut-n-paste to be cool) and I don't want to confuse those that understand nothing, with more than 2 syllabales...I'll take an approach that, altho it isn't as soft intellectually, at least it will be understood.

I'll just laugh at the silly liberal hack-job.

:S2: :S2: :S2: :S2: :S2:

Oh......ok. Here's a link: The Saddam-9/11 Link Confirmed (http://www.rushonline.com/visitors/linkconfirmed.htm)

<doh> The Jetsons are on...gotta run. :jointsmile:

fishman3811
03-27-2008, 02:07 AM
Rusty i had a good laugh from the link to that rush limbaugh page.Muhammad Atta was in America at the time of the meeting in Prague end of story

FeedmeWeed
03-27-2008, 04:29 AM
Gotta love these cut-n-paste heros. So individualistic, they can't even form a few sentences to express individual thought. Where have your "question authority" morals gone, when you consistently cut-n-paste thoughts from those liberals that do the thinking for you, and tell you where your anger lies today.
I guess it's tough being an individual, when y'all are just another blinded sheep in the flock of discontent.

No comments in regards to the articles' content, no intelligent analysis of facts, just taking someone elses work, and two clicks later, they are your deepest heartfelt thoughts. Lazy and lacking any form of higher thinking.

Amazing how this all works.

So, since there is often no evidence to the contrary, I'm led to believe this is the depth and breadth of the liberal thought processes, (yes master...cut-n-paste...must cut-n-paste to be cool) and I don't want to confuse those that understand nothing, with more than 2 syllabales...I'll take an approach that, altho it isn't as soft intellectually, at least it will be understood.

I'll just laugh at the silly liberal hack-job.

:S2: :S2: :S2: :S2: :S2:

Oh......ok. Here's a link: The Saddam-9/11 Link Confirmed (http://www.rushonline.com/visitors/linkconfirmed.htm)

<doh> The Jetsons are on...gotta run. :jointsmile:

thanks for the great responce.

this is an internet forum, my goal was to expose readers to new material and ideas that they may have not encountered, and then form a discussion off of said material. Would you prefer me to throw in a bunch of bias BS that has no relevant info to this topic? Oh wait, you did that for me :pimp::pimp:

was it too long for ya kiddo? want me to break it down for you or explain any of the big words for you?

edit: LOL....a link to rush limbaugh... get real

hes the republican equivilant of that alex jones character

Nathan604
03-27-2008, 04:43 AM
doesnt bush have enough money? like wow whats he gonna do with it all:jointsmile:

Rusty Trichome
03-27-2008, 05:27 AM
thanks for the great responce.

this is an internet forum, my goal was to expose readers to new material and ideas that they may have not encountered, and then form a discussion off of said material. Would you prefer me to throw in a bunch of bias BS that has no relevant info to this topic? Oh wait, you did that for me :pimp::pimp:

was it too long for ya kiddo? want me to break it down for you or explain any of the big words for you?


At least I was commenting. Far more effort than you seemed interested in putting-in.
Actually, I see nothing wrong with Bush and Cheney's comments, however the reporters slant is a bit askew. As the report is slanted, this takes it out of the realm of journalism, and throws in in the same category as The View. An editorial.

This sophmorically lazy method of cut-n-paste spam is bullshit. This explination of your motives is obvious bullshit. You say you posted it to create a dialog with those that haven't been exposed to the subject, yet say nothing before or after the posting explaining your views, pointing out highlights or offering a point to be learned from your precious posting, no asking for dialog...nothing. No original thoughts or speech. No involving yourself in any way besides cut-n-paste.

All you present is someone else writing a common leftist media article with a anti-Bush administration slant. BFD. I can come up with hundreds of thousands of articles bashing both sides of the aisle. But when I do, I add the context, reasoning, other discussion-inducing statements showing I at least read the damn thing. When put in the context you presented this article...it's not an istrument presented to further intelligent doalog. Just another page of hack-n-spam.

Can you comment on this article you presented, or do you just cut-n-paste, then give good rep to others that respond intelligently for you?

What I hear from all this: "I cut-n-paste...hear me whine"

Would you finally like to talk about your, up to this point, unarticulated article...or would you prefer to continue this discussion?

FeedmeWeed
03-27-2008, 08:32 AM
At least I was commenting. Far more effort than you seemed interested in putting-in.
Actually, I see nothing wrong with Bush and Cheney's comments, however the reporters slant is a bit askew. As the report is slanted, this takes it out of the realm of journalism, and throws in in the same category as The View. An editorial.

This sophmorically lazy method of cut-n-paste spam is bullshit. This explination of your motives is obvious bullshit. You say you posted it to create a dialog with those that haven't been exposed to the subject, yet say nothing before or after the posting explaining your views, pointing out highlights or offering a point to be learned from your precious posting, no asking for dialog...nothing. No original thoughts or speech. No involving yourself in any way besides cut-n-paste.

All you present is someone else writing a common leftist media article with a anti-Bush administration slant. BFD. I can come up with hundreds of thousands of articles bashing both sides of the aisle. But when I do, I add the context, reasoning, other discussion-inducing statements showing I at least read the damn thing. When put in the context you presented this article...it's not an istrument presented to further intelligent doalog. Just another page of hack-n-spam.

Can you comment on this article you presented, or do you just cut-n-paste, then give good rep to others that respond intelligently for you?

What I hear from all this: "I cut-n-paste...hear me whine"

Would you finally like to talk about your, up to this point, unarticulated article...or would you prefer to continue this discussion?

sorry i started to read what you said, then I realized it was yet another pile of crap....NEXT!

thcbongman
03-27-2008, 12:07 PM
thanks for the great responce.

this is an internet forum, my goal was to expose readers to new material and ideas that they may have not encountered, and then form a discussion off of said material. Would you prefer me to throw in a bunch of bias BS that has no relevant info to this topic? Oh wait, you did that for me :pimp::pimp:

was it too long for ya kiddo? want me to break it down for you or explain any of the big words for you?

edit: LOL....a link to rush limbaugh... get real

hes the republican equivilant of that alex jones character

You did throw in BS not relevant to the topic! You failed to address the main point of the article and only highlighted three points, a statement from a liberal think tank and some remarks about Cheney. It proves shit and although me and Rusty have completely different views, he's intellectually honest. You are not.

Why don't you address the main point of the article: the economic consequences of withdrawing from Iraq.

Rusty Trichome
03-27-2008, 12:42 PM
sorry i started to read what you said, then I realized it was yet another pile of crap....NEXT!
Ahh...yet another cry of "UNCLE". :jointsmile:
I can't wait for the next post. "I'll be back".

Psycho4Bud
03-27-2008, 01:01 PM
My best insticts on this thread is to close it down but I'm going to see who can actually hold their water. ONCE MORE TO EVERYONE.....we can debate without personal insults so take it for what it's worth.

Likewise, and this goes out to a few members in here, if you do a cut and paste with no comment, don't be suprised when people question where the hell ya stand on the topic:
"Would you prefer me to throw in a bunch of bias BS that has no relevant info to this topic?" Your choice, but at least give some bit of personal thought regarding the topic.

Have a good one!:jointsmile: