digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate

Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.

The Iraq War Was About Oil, All Along

alternet.org — There you have it. After a long exile, Exxon Mobil, Shell, Total and BP are back in Iraq. And on the wings of no-bid contracts -- that's right, sweetheart deals like those given Halliburton, KBR and Blackwater. The kind of deals you get only if you have friends in high places. And these war profiteers have friends in very high places.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • BCCStu, on 07/07/2008, -13/+313And this is a surprise why?
    • shna, on 07/07/2008, -17/+9Not for you few hundreds..or may be thousands others...but remember there are millions in our country who dont even know who is running for president.....
      Support Resistance....markdicedotcom
    • mshtml, on 07/07/2008, -5/+60Joe six-pack thinks the war on terrorism is real. He believes you can declare war on a tactic and fight it. The tactic's stronghold is currently located in Iraq, the central front of the war. If you suggest the war is about oil or anything else the conditioning he's been exposed to on every tv channel, radio station and print article kicks in and he'll resist all that you tell him.
      • peestandingup, on 07/08/2008, -1/+24"They hate us for our freedoms!"
      • tomasII, on 07/08/2008, -7/+1Just like you deny that terrorism is a threat to our country right? You suck up any information that is contrary to your leftist leanings and declare everyone else to be inferior because they don't think like you.

        Classic liberal tactic.
      • mshtml, on 07/08/2008, -3/+5I'm a republican.
    • trghpy, on 07/08/2008, -2/+19Surprise? no.
      Pissed off I'm not getting an Iraqi oil check, Yes.
    • xadhominemx, on 07/08/2008, -4/+11No, I'm not surprised at all that oil is being extracted by those who have the means in a country with ~20% of the earth's total reserves.

      PS: only one American company is listed!
    • Asianwaste, on 07/08/2008, -0/+11If you factor oil out of the equation, there are so many reasons why it was a bad idea to go in there in the first place. Militaristic stand point, the job wasn't done in Afghanistan and would thus spread ourselves too thin. Also if I remember correctly, Saddam Hussein wasn't in the best terms with Islamic extremists... let alone Al Qaeda and Osama. Politically we weren't supported by too many of our allies on this one and half the country thought it was a terrible idea. Yet we still did it anyways... so yea.. was it about oil? ***** duh!
      • stickyman, on 07/08/2008, -1/+4try none of 'your allies'

        Britain and Australia and a few others may well have sent troops, but only about 10% of the population in the UK and OZ wanted it
      • cygnus2112, on 07/08/2008, -0/+4The Administration screwed the pooch when it came to the military campaign. Just like Afghanistan, they didn't and haven't sent in enough troops to ensure success. Another big mistake was sacking the entire Iraq Army and barring Baathists from serving. What are 100,000+ unemployed Sunni military guys going to do with their free time to support their families?

        But from the perspective of one Canadian - I'm glad to see Saddam dead and his regime removed.
    • mugicha, on 07/08/2008, -1/+8Who said it was a surprise?
    • Rimbo, on 07/08/2008, -8/+4What's surprising to me is how alternet and digg folks seem to think this is a BAD thing.

      ExxonMobil and the like are absolutely dwarfed by the NOCs, especially Saudi Aramco. This is why these companies are genuinely interested in pursuing alternative fuels; in the oil biz, they're just tiny little specs. ExxonMobil and co. are to oil companies what Nisus Writer is to word processors -- a tiny little bit player in a niche market that could be crushed by its main dominant competitors like a bug whenever they wanted to.
      • senatorpjt, on 07/08/2008, -1/+7Yeah, it's ridiculous how these backwards countries think that their natural resources belong to them. Think of how bad it would be if ExxonMobil/ConocoPhillips/Chevron were a part of the US government - that $600 annual profit for every man, woman, and child in the USA that ended up in their pockets would end up being part of the federal revenue instead.
      • FungusAmungus, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1You act as if we aren't paying them anything for it. Yes, the oil companies are there and they are drilling, but fortunately this isn't the "I drink your milkshake" scenario. The people are being paid for their resources.

        I think the war is stupid too, but it's like you people want us to revert back to the Middle Ages. We need oil to sustain our way of life. Either we need to get it domestically, which is out of the question to you environmentalists, or we can get it overseas.

        What happens when the largest port in Saudi Arabia is hit with a terrorist attack and severely hampers the distribution of oil globally? Believe me, this isn't a campaign for the war on terrorism, but Christ I don't want to live in a world with no internet or worse yet, no global economy.

        You people need to grow up and look at the big picture. All this he did this, he did that ***** is getting old. Yes, we know Bush is a *****, and mistakes have been made. That doesn't mean you continue to make further errors given past blunders.
    • RoflCoptah, on 07/08/2008, -0/+7im suprised that this was considered news and that there were that many diehards who believed we were in iraq to protect 'freedoms'
    • soupdawg30, on 07/08/2008, -1/+6Play any RTS and what does it all come down to. Resources, I fully support the War for Oil.
      • DevilDriver, on 07/08/2008, -1/+1Play any RTS and the goal is to dominate the map or eliminate the other player. I guess that's what America's going for then?
      • soupdawg30, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1Yes. Hope you're an ally.
    • danconia, on 07/08/2008, -0/+9I won't lie I haven't read the article but if anything I'd be surprised that they said we went for "oil" instead of being more clear (and accurate/precise for that matter) and just saying that we went so that big corporations could make big money.

      I love political theory and did some research of my own into politics in general and was never quite satisfied with most of the mainstream theories as to why we went to Iraq. So dug and I dug until finally I learned more about the military-industrial complex (which really is just a term that is useless unless you are purposely trying to confuse someone instead of educate them) and how lobbyists, politicians, and big corporations work together to both make profits off of war (and Americans and other innocent non-American humans dying without any real moral justification) and push for unnecessary wars at the first sniff of possible conflict in order to create a profit-rich environment.

      Insecure, rash people will tell you every Muslim is out to get you and only America can stop the world from being overtaken by Islam but what they don't realize is that if any religion is "so evil" then the first action a rational and moral person should take is to lead by example. Invading and bombing 3rd world countries because you're scared they *might* do something bad to you is both immoral and logically inconsistent (or contradictory).

      I'm no pacifist or hippy but I'm pretty well convinced that the large majority of wars and conflicts that we start or join into are completely unnecessary. But hey the politicians, lobbyists, and CEOs disagree with me and they are the ones making the decisions (with my/our money...)!
    • mostfynest, on 07/08/2008, -7/+2The biggest big picture here is actually more about us "westerners" taking pre emptive control of middle easts' oil before the likes of China and its' allies do. We're a generation past those who survived WWII and believe me it only takes on despot member of the CCP to set off WWIII. Do these Arabs deserve our money just becuase the land they settled on contains the fuel we need to drive our economies? Do we have to pay for these palaces, flash cars, private jets, hotels in London? NO YOUR DAMN ***** RIGHT WE DON'T GOOD ON YOU BUSH FOR DOING THE RIGHT THING, WE WESTERNERS CONTRIBUTE FAR MORE TO THE WORLD THAN ISLAM DOES AS FAR AS MEDICINE AND TECHNOLOGY ETC IS CONCERNED. SO IT IS OUR RIGHT TO HAVE FULL CONTROL OVER THESE NATURAL RESOURCES SO WE CAN FURTHER OUR GOOD WORK. WHEN OBAMA GET'S HE WILL CONTINUE BUSHES GOOD WORK AND THANK CHRIST FOR THAT. IRAQ was first IRAN will be next and I'll cry with joy when I see Saudia Arabia invaded. SUPPORT THIS CAMPAIGN AND REMEMBER THE BIG PICTURE AS TOO WHY THIS WAR START IN THE FIRST PLACE.
      • fuzzweed, on 07/08/2008, -1/+3You, sir, are an idiot.
      • csw1342, on 07/08/2008, -1/+1Thanks, Adolph

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armenian_quote
      • mostfynest, on 07/08/2008, -1/+1Forget oil companies, and politics, think of the world with different races fighting for a survival, in all fairness it us America and it's allies who deserve this oil, forget Exxon, and their profits politics will eventually sort out this monopoly. We control the oil, we control the world, it's either this or we risk being conquered by a Russian Chinese world coup de'tat. Don't think of the present, think of our future generations this is why this war is happening and will continue until we control all the resources including uranium. If you look back in history we "Europeans" have never been instigators of wars, it is ALWAYS the minorities of this world who have the innate primitive "lets conquer and have absoloute power" type attitude, get educated before you dig me down.
    • Espinha, on 07/08/2008, -1/+4Ditto mate, this isn't a surprise at all.... maybe for Americans it is, but not for us Europeans, or for anyone else in the world...
    • thisguy457, on 07/08/2008, -1/+5This is the most blaringly ridiculous article I've ever read. Do any of you know WHY they've gotten no-bid contracts? It's because for the past 7 years they've been giving FREE services to the Iraqi government on how to set up their oil infrastructure. That's right FREE consulting, FREE work, FREE use of equipment, FREE EVERYTHING. Get your heads out of the sand. Not everything is a conspiracy.

      PS. Only one of those companies is a US company.... BP - British, Shell - Dutch, Total - French....
    • flink405, on 07/08/2008, -3/+6Iraq sold oil before the war. Iraq has always had and sold oil.

      The United States governement does not get the oil in Iraq (or the revenue from selling it).
      The oil goes into the big oil market that is bought and sold worldwide and the revenue is split between Iraq and its oil business partners.
      The U.S. government gets no money.

      When you put gas in your car can you tell which country the oil came from that the gasoline was made from?
    • bono4u, on 07/08/2008, -0/+3only for those without the tinfoil hat

      I remember too well how i was considered a conspiracy nut by mentioning my opinion that it is only about oil.
    • springboks, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1alternet.org reader - "GASP! The war was about oil"
    • Nytrixxx, on 07/08/2008, -0/+0Only if oil was the only reason we are there. If it was only that simple. There are money making machines that are making much more money off of us than the oil. It is so easy to come to a conclusion and stop looking deeper into it.
    • OwdenBowden, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Wow - thanks a lot for the posting CoffeeJoost. Maybe you should change your digg name to CaptainObvious?

      By the way - the War in Iraq was and will always be about two things:
      1. Oil
      2. Retribution by Bush Jr. for the plotted assassination of Bush Sr.
    • kgtech, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1I'm just glad they admitted to it.
  • torgo112, on 07/07/2008, -35/+27Of course it was about oil. I don't think it was so GWB could enrich his buddies as is suggested above, but it certainly was because the world economy runs on oil, and getting oil out of Iraq could stabilize world oil markets, which would have a direct impact on the US economy and great political upside for the GOP. Oil is the only reason we've ever bothered with Iraq, or the middle east in general.
    • ninjadave, on 07/07/2008, -3/+9Not the only reason. All those American dollars to pay for foreign oil to countries that are still developing. Wouldn't it be great to get some of those dollars back in to American hands?

      Say, why don't we build giant unneccesary infrastructure there using our engineering companies...
    • chicofaraby, on 07/07/2008, -5/+43"I don't think it was so GWB could enrich his buddies"

      Yeah. That was accidental.

      Right.
      • blanketfury, on 07/08/2008, -6/+2That's like accidently invading Iraq for weapons of mass destruction.

        Oh wait.
    • RetroMetro, on 07/08/2008, -6/+6you're a simpleton.
    • SmokinOkie, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1No, it wasn't about oil. I am a Conservative republican. I only say that because my next statement will bring claims that I'm just another dem bitching about Bush. The war isn't about oil and never was. It was about Bush wanting to make a name for himself in history. Nothing more. The WMD claim as the cause isn't valid unless we march into Iran and North Korea as well.
  • chadwalters23, on 07/07/2008, -10/+200Here, if you have a country, and I have a country, and I have a straw. There it is, that's a straw, you see? You watching?. And my straw reaches acroooooooss the world, and starts to drink your country... I... drink... your... country!
    • shutaro, on 07/07/2008, -11/+42In Soviet Russia, country drink you!
    • urgeigh, on 07/08/2008, -11/+2When the hell did that line turn into the new internet fad? I thought that movie was kinda disappointing overall, but that scene was pretty awesome.
      • danthemanhan, on 07/08/2008, -3/+13there will be blood was the best ***** movie I've ever seen.
      • urgeigh, on 07/08/2008, -2/+7I don't like arguing over matters of personal taste but I dunno man, it was so hyped up by critics and I could see why someone would like it a lot but I just found it overall kind of boring and lacking something I can't quite put my finger on. Definitely not the worst movie imo or anything, just calling it the best movie ever is kind of a stretch. Movies I liked better than "There will be blood": American Beauty, The Shawshank Redemption, L.A. Confidential, The Usual Suspects, Forrest Gump, No Country For Old Men, Snatch, The Departed, The Green Mile, I'll just stop there. To each his own I guess.
      • SpeedSteamBoat, on 07/08/2008, -0/+4I believe this is relevant to the topic as opposed to just being pointless regurgitation of a "fad."

        Just saying.
    • speakafreaka, on 07/08/2008, -3/+16http://lh4.ggpht.com/speakafreaka/SHLdGHTxqDI/AAAA ...

      Americans.

      They will drink your milkshake
    • mostfynest, on 07/08/2008, -12/+0The biggest big picture here is actually more about us "westerners" taking pre emptive control of middle easts' oil before the likes of China and its' allies do. We're a generation past those who survived WWII and believe me it only takes on despot member of the CCP to set off WWIII. Do these Arabs deserve our money just becuase the land they settled on contains the fuel we need to drive our economies? Do we have to pay for these palaces, flash cars, private jets, hotels in London? NO YOUR DAMN ***** RIGHT WE DON'T GOOD ON YOU BUSH FOR DOING THE RIGHT THING, WE WESTERNERS CONTRIBUTE FAR MORE TO THE WORLD THAN ISLAM DOES AS FAR AS MEDICINE AND TECHNOLOGY ETC IS CONCERNED. SO IT IS OUR RIGHT TO HAVE FULL CONTROL OVER THESE NATURAL RESOURCES SO WE CAN FURTHER OUR GOOD WORK. WHEN OBAMA GET'S HE WILL CONTINUE BUSHES GOOD WORK AND THANK CHRIST FOR THAT. IRAQ was first IRAN will be next and I'll cry with joy when I see Saudia Arabia invaded. SUPPORT THIS CAMPAIGN AND REMEMBER THE BIG PICTURE AS TOO WHY THIS WAR START IN THE FIRST PLACE.
      • BobOki, on 07/08/2008, -1/+3I cannot state this any other way.
        You are an idiot.
        This burn the village to save it crap was out the windows back in the 1800s.
    • akrondude, on 07/08/2008, -2/+3a few articles from now, this quote will get dugg /down/ over 100 times because people will be tired of seeing it.

      I can hardly wait. . .
      • mostfynest, on 07/08/2008, -5/+0Forget oil companies, and politics, think of the world with different races fighting for a survival, in all fairness it us America and it's allies who deserve this oil, forget Exxon, and their profits politics will eventually sort out this monopoly. We control the oil, we control the world, it's either this or we risk being conquered by a Russian Chinese world coup de'tat. Don't think of the present, think of our future generations this is why this war is happening and will continue until we control all the resources including uranium. If you look back in history we "Europeans" have never been instigators of wars, it is ALWAYS the minorities of this world who have the innate primitive "lets conquer and have absoloute power" type attitude, get educated before you dig me down.
      • sodade, on 07/08/2008, -1/+5"We control the oil, we control the world, it's either this or we risk being conquered by a Russian Chinese world coup de'tat."
        Gee is that you Rumsfeld? Cheney? Some random neocon? Yeah, well nobody believes that ***** you ***** have been spewing anymore. Please take your lies and FUD and go die in a fire.

      • mostfynest, on 07/08/2008, -3/+0Yeah well at 40 yrs old if thats the best you can come up with then that explains alot about you and your personality, RUBBISH - obviously a minority I was talking about, no wonder your so offended, truth hurts doesn't it?
    • Vodd9, on 07/08/2008, -8/+3Quoting lines from popular culture is getting really old. And unoriginal. Also not adding anything to the discussion on such an important topic.
    • coyote1284, on 07/08/2008, -1/+4Yes, but does your country bring all the boys to the yard?
    • fattymcgee311, on 07/08/2008, -1/+2Strangely erotic...
  • acbrimm, on 07/07/2008, -8/+73Just another reason why we need to take our country back from these tyrants that control everything behind the scenes. But I'm sure any type of rebellion will be sifted out with wire tappings taken care of and covered up. And the downward spiral continues with the once again terrible nominees for the presidency; why is it always the choice between the lesser of two evils?
    • speakafreaka, on 07/08/2008, -3/+17Do you think your average Joe Public would care about what was happening on the other side of the world right now if it meant $1 / gallon gas?

      You'd be hard pressed to find anyone who cares about anything outside their family circle these days
      • JBmtk, on 07/08/2008, -0/+17For good reason...everyone around is a dumb ass
      • kevisazombie, on 07/08/2008, -0/+2Joe Public could care less as long as the TV is still on.
    • britblogger, on 07/08/2008, -8/+3and just how do you propose to take back your country?

      you're probably one of the same people that are pro-gun control, hence giving you absolutely no chance of "taking back your country" - you do know that every American has the right to bear arms, right?

      choose your battle, digg wisely.
      • senatorpjt, on 07/08/2008, -0/+4Well, I don't know if anyone bothered to poll this question, but it seems almost everyone supports banning fully-automatic rifles even though that's the exact type of weapon the second amendment is supposed to preserve access to (standard infantry issue) - not hunting rifles and handguns.
      • Bravesguy18, on 07/08/2008, -0/+3Yeah, you don't want the King of England coming in your house and shoving you around. Do you?
    • brad3378, on 07/08/2008, -0/+3>>>why is it always the choice between the lesser of two evils?

      Otherwise you wouldn't be able to flip a coin.
    • kevincw01, on 07/08/2008, -1/+1aha! wait, what?
    • TheImaginator, on 07/08/2008, -0/+2Because in the UK and the US, people always vote for one of the two evils.
      Always.
    • bgrah449, on 07/08/2008, -0/+2I like to type into Google, "Guns to kill the president george w. bush" and "how to obtain volatile gasses," that kind of thing, just to throw some noise into their algorithms. ***** them.
      • sodade, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1What we need to do is get a campaign going of under 18 kids, soccer moms and grandpa joe all doing this.
      • SpacePoet, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1You're nuts if you're not kidding. You have any idea how many watch lists you are on? Great now i'm on one too for talking to you...
      • SmokinOkie, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1And you are a dumb ass.
  • kavutu, on 07/07/2008, -7/+28The Chinese are pumping and getting the oil from the lower half of Iraq. what does this tell you? Until we take back our out of control goverment we are getting exactly what we deserve. take action my fellow Americans!! Arise, march on DC, revolt, pillage and plunder until the beltway bandits understand we are fed up with being sold a bill of non existent goods! Arise! Fight! Win! Show ya have a pair!!
    • Sil369, on 07/08/2008, -3/+1"what does this tell you?"

      Iraq is the 51st state of America!
    • regeya, on 07/08/2008, -2/+6"The Chinese are pumping and getting the oil from the lower half of Iraq. what does this tell you?"

      It tells me that the war wasn't really about getting cheap oil for Americans...
      • Dumbledorito, on 07/08/2008, -3/+7Or that Bush & Company are so incredibly inept that they ***** that up as well.
      • jlfb, on 07/08/2008, -1/+7Naw, they knew what they were doing. It's just that their goals are completely at odds with those of regular people. They got what they wanted, and it is WE who pay the price. Success!
    • russ3, on 07/08/2008, -2/+2I'm right behind you buddy.
    • rz8472, on 07/08/2008, -2/+4You first. Even in a situation such as Zimbabwe's, which is 1000 times worse than we have it here, Mugabe is still in power. What does this tell you about people in general?
      • whorunbartertwn, on 07/08/2008, -1/+6Show you have a pair... by posting about your anger on digg.
    • sparf, on 07/08/2008, -1/+6"Now there's revolution,
      but they don't know what they're fighting."

      --Ian Anderson
    • Mude, on 07/08/2008, -0/+11I was with you until you said "pillage and plunder." Take back control of our government, but wreck some storefronts and steal some TVs first! I don't think so.
    • shig, on 07/08/2008, -1/+4There is nothing left to "pillage and plunder".
  • Kakcoo, on 07/07/2008, -13/+28Someone should have hooked the Bush up to a lie detector.
    • Vocifer, on 07/07/2008, -5/+34I misread that as "electric chair." Either way.
    • DiggDuggDugged, on 07/08/2008, -0/+9The machine would cease to exist, in a violent implosion. Kinda like a robot after being presented with a logical paradox, sans logic. Or, picture Satan touching the holy cross if that iconography suits you.
    • BobOki, on 07/08/2008, -1/+3Lie detectors only work if the person is smart enough to know they are lying.
    • senatorpjt, on 07/08/2008, -0/+7Lie detectors don't detect lies, they detect stress. They don't work if you're comfortable with lying.
    • AlienMushroom, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1I prefer a waterboarding station.
    • Blanchflower, on 07/08/2008, -0/+3"I'm going to run a few tests. This is a simple lie detector. I'll ask you a few yes-or-no questions and you just answer truthfully. Do you understand?"

      "Yes!"

      *BOOM*
  • FatherDEath, on 07/07/2008, -2/+21but think of all the amazing sand mmmmm yummmy thats what it was realy for sand our children's sand boxes have been getting low to the point we have been using wood chip substitutes
  • Thrilltone, on 07/07/2008, -5/+100We overthrew Saddam after he stopped using Dollars as the currency for trading in oil.
    Iran has already done it for petroleum based products and crude is next.
    They already demand that the Japanese pay in Yen.
    This practice will expose our house of cards, if it spreads, hence the coming Iran invasion.
    When the dollar was named the world reserve currency in 1944, our economy skyrocketed.
    When the dollar is unpegged from oil and other commodities, all Hell will break loose in the U.S.
    • Marijuana, on 07/08/2008, -2/+28Sad but true.
      • JBmtk, on 07/08/2008, -2/+12You must have registered early on digg to get that user name
      • filmbandit, on 07/08/2008, -1/+5diggs first doper? this is a proud moment *sniff*
    • dizilbdog, on 07/08/2008, -0/+8I heard that rant on Adam Curry Henry Kissinger was the guy who set that all up a long time ago. Iraq and Iran were the two countries who didn't go along with Mr. Kissinger we already invaded Iraq and look who we are knocking on the door next Iran.
    • Ryan166, on 07/08/2008, -4/+2Good thing I'm heavily invested in Wampum.
    • CHANNELOCK, on 07/08/2008, -0/+10Thats why Im buying Spam by the case.
      God I feel depressed visting digg at times
      • CCUboogernjit, on 07/08/2008, -4/+2then dont visit digg. Trust me if you ignore these nutjobs your life will be alot better cuz you will have a life.

        /sarcasm
    • henrikakselsen, on 07/08/2008, -0/+6I think you're absolutely right. The shift of oil trade-currency from Dollar to other currencies are one of the US biggest fear, still I have never ever seen American press write about it, only European press.
    • solid12345, on 07/08/2008, -1/+3So in the name of national interests, if invading Iraq was about dollars-to-Euros what was wrong with it?

      Saddam had nothing to gain by switching to Euros. Iraq was under food-for-oil and what currency did it matter,all they were receiving were food and medical supplies. If Saddam was intent to change the oil market it was to damage our economic well-being which in my opinion is a big enough reason to attack, if Saddam can invade Kuwait on accusations of slant drilling why can't we invade on accusations of trying to sabotage the world oil market?
      • sodade, on 07/08/2008, -0/+2And there it is in all its glory. The US can do anything it wants to protect its economic interests around the world. Don't you people understand that Iran and Iraq have a right to do whatever the ***** they wanted with THEIR OIL? If the US can't keep their economy afloat without imperialism and nation building, then we DON'T ***** DESERVE our prosperity.
      • lhbaker, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Google Iran Oil Bourse. Read. Learn. Change you mind.
      • solid12345, on 07/09/2008, -0/+1Sodade, it is their oil but who built all the equipment in the mideast to get it out of the ground? We did. American engineers built and kept the oil wells operating so it is just as much our business as it is theirs.

        If I sell you a boat and teach you how to use it to catch fish am I not entitled to some say about your profits you get from fishing?
    • tomasII, on 07/08/2008, -4/+1We over threw saddam after he defied UN mandates more than a dozen times.

      If we were benefitting from their oil would the price be 4 bucks a gallon now?
      • lhbaker, on 07/08/2008, -1/+2Have you been living in a tarpaper shack?
  • yellowcakewalk, on 07/07/2008, -10/+42It had more to do with serving Israel, though the oil kleptocracy was glad to go along for the ride. Remember, it was Israeli spies like Douglas Feith and David Wurmser that were cooking the intel to lie the public and lie congress into war.
    • revisrev, on 07/07/2008, -5/+13Uh-oh, you know if this makes the front page that certain members are going to call you an anti-Semite for the umpteen-thousandth time. In a way, I'm jealous... I've only been falsely accused of antisemitism a hand full of times.
    • colonelbuckshot, on 07/07/2008, -4/+8http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts04232008.html

      The more likely explanation for the US invasion of Iraq is the neoconservative Bush Regime’s commitment to the defense of Israeli territorial expansion. There is no such thing as a neoconservative who is not allied with Israel. Israel hopes to steal all of the West Bank and southern Lebanon for its territorial expansion. An American colonial regime in Iraq not only buttresses Israel from attack, but also can pressure Syria and Iran from giving support to the Palestinians and Lebanese. The Iraqi war is a war for Israeli territorial expansion. Americans are dying and bleeding to death financially for Israel. Bush’s “war on terror” is a hoax that serves to cover US intervention in the Middle East in behalf of “greater Israel.”
      • Garglebutt, on 07/08/2008, -3/+0By God I've never seen so many buzzwords in one place
      • solid12345, on 07/08/2008, -0/+4"Greater" Israel, what a joke. The Israelis can't even make the Palestinians settle down, you really think Israel believes they could control the Shias in Lebanon too?

        The only "Greater" ideology was that of Syria who occupied Lebanon for 20 years believing it to be their territory stolen by French colonists.
      • mrbeagle, on 07/08/2008, -1/+2And to what end, colonelbuckshot? What do the neocons stand to gain from helping Israel? Anything...?

        People should spend less time speculating on why the invasion happened, and more time thinking about how to re-assert control over their own government and keep this from ever happening again.
    • solid12345, on 07/08/2008, -1/+2If Saddam was no threat to America as you people imply, what makes you think the Israelis were scared of him?

      The IDF has and has always been more interested in Iran, not Saddam.
  • jezsik, on 07/07/2008, -3/+49I read that the original name for Operation Iraqi Freedom was supposed to be:
    Operation
    Iraqi
    Liberation
    (I suppose someone suggested they should be a bit more subtle.)
    • swrostmore, on 07/08/2008, -2/+12That is a fact, although I wish somebody could come up with a screencap of it on CNN to head off the revisionist history that is surely headed our way. It was not only "supposed to be" O.I.L., the name was actively used by the Administration and their Pentagon propaganda force for about a week prior to "shock and awe."
    • killerofkiller, on 07/08/2008, -1/+25http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20 ...
      ctrl-F
      Operation Iraqi Liberation
  • Surferess, on 07/07/2008, -3/+36Who could have seen that coming? I am just Shocked and in Awe!
  • rareimagery, on 07/07/2008, -7/+1That's as novel and insightful as the Weeds story...
  • KenCW, on 07/07/2008, -6/+11Duh
  • monsterette, on 07/07/2008, -3/+7Wow...this does cause quite an argument that can just go on and on about its orgin and purpose, but ultimately we have been reduced to people - the political analyst Kevin Phillips said it best - "... doing anything to gain access to expensive fuel without regard to the lives of others or the earth itself... lust for oil came at the price of his son and his soul." That's a thought, but a thought does not change an action or people.



  • rationalbeats, on 07/07/2008, -8/+80Hey and it only cost us about 4500 soldiers lives, and the permanently disfigured over 20,000 more troops, and created the largest debt that any country has ever acquired in the history of mankind.

    Thanks President Bush.
    • Sil369, on 07/08/2008, -10/+7Don't forget backdoor drafts.

      (I just watched Stop-Loss)
    • alexismyhomeboi, on 07/08/2008, -5/+12Bush is just a puppet. If not him, some other bloke would do it too.
      • wiihippie, on 07/08/2008, -1/+2I concur
      • alwilson, on 07/08/2008, -1/+13You mean McCain?
      • Jarden, on 07/08/2008, -1/+10That does not, however, excuse him.
      • BobOki, on 07/08/2008, -0/+3And somehow that makes it ok,... Poor Bush didn't know any bwetter and we should just tell him to be smarter next time?
        ***** that, kill the son of the bitch, kill the VP, kill congress... kill anyone in office that did not speak out.
    • stickyman, on 07/08/2008, -1/+6Yeah, don't worry about all the Iraqis that have been killed and maimed.

      And the fact that America has just created 50 years of Islamic terrorism for the west.

      Gee, thanks guys.

      Why don't you pull your head out of you arse.
      • sodade, on 07/08/2008, -0/+4"And the fact that America has just created 50 years of Islamic terrorism for the west."

        That point can't be stressed enough. How do we make idiot america understand this?
    • Dittz, on 07/08/2008, -0/+4Errmmmm.. ... the tens of thousands of Iraqi dead. They are of the human race too last time i checked.
      • Myztry, on 07/08/2008, -1/+1But the Middle Eastern countries have been constantly at war and killing each other for centuries. If there was actual peace over there, I think they'd be lost as to what to do with themselves.
        And on that note, the stupidest thing a country can do is pick a fight with a people who's wars tend to last for centuries rather than years.
      • Dittz, on 08/06/2008, -0/+1Well maybe. The same could prob be said for a lot of Africa. Though im sure the average Joe in the middle east and africa would love nothing better than some peace, security and resulting in an ulitmatley a better standard of life. Thats prob why lots of people emigrate from their lands to the West.

        Personally a dead Iraqi has the same value for me a dead Brit or Amercian.
  • ghaib, on 07/07/2008, -5/+22No *****, Sherlock!
  • borez, on 07/07/2008, -24/+18"The Iraq War Was About Oil, All Along"

    You ***** think?

    Buried.
    • SoulGrub, on 07/08/2008, -0/+17Today a digger commented that the US invaded for the good of the iraqi people. This is still news to a lot of people.
  • JJJohnson, on 07/07/2008, -14/+2NEVER
  • colonelbuckshot, on 07/07/2008, -9/+10The Iraq war was about much more than just oil deals. Do you think that the neoconservative political movement that cooked up the war has ever been preoccupied with oil?
    • BobOki, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1With gas being "magically" $2.00 more than when Bush got in office, do you think it is not?
      p.s. forget the fact that they just released the numbers in Feb, and we are using LESS gas than we were when Bush got IN office.
  • Fast05GT, on 07/08/2008, -5/+18Only took you nearly 6 yrs to realize that?
    • Alegoo92, on 07/08/2008, -1/+2Did we just do a bad job or something? Because we have no more oil under our control and oil companies getting sweetheart deals in no way helps us or our government.
      • revisrev, on 07/08/2008, -3/+2...or perhaps oil wasn't the main cause, but one of a few, the most predominant being Israeli territorial expansion???
  • killcops, on 07/08/2008, -8/+1duh, that and the masons.
  • MasterThief117, on 07/08/2008, -4/+33In other news, water is wet, and ice is cold.
  • lebsoljah, on 07/08/2008, -16/+10The New World Order is real, just like a war for oil is real, just like 9/11 was an inside job ("providing terrorists the tools, money and green light.... then letting it happen makes them just as guilty"), just like PNAC members would go as far as killing their own people to push their fake advertizing, just like those who don't believe that what I just said is NOT true is the reason why this administration has all this at ease, just like history repeats itself and Bush supporters today would have been Hitler supporters back then, just like these neocons will bring the country down with them because they've integrated themselves into the system with Bill Krystol backing the fake alternative Obama (ok I support him.... but he's not the change we think he is) Just like Bush's grandfather helped Hitler rise to power, just like the reason Bush can't be impeached is because he's a stupid puppet and there are no laws against being an idiot because most Americans are...

    I guess we know too much... What can we do?

    Grow up, wear a tie and join em'

    Nah...
    • swrostmore, on 07/08/2008, -6/+5Kristol does not back Obama and 9/11 was not an inside job.
      • lebsoljah, on 07/08/2008, -6/+4Do you watch FOX? He bashes McCain almost daily and says that Obama would make a better president...


        9/11 was not an inside job? So you're saying that PNAC members would not go as far as planning the deaths of their own people to pursue an agenda planned before 9/11 that would have only worked with 9/11 (new pearl harbor mentionned in the 2000 PNAC document, section : rebuilding America's defences)

        "9/11 was not an inside job" is the only lie that's keeping these criminals in office and thanks to your ignorance to the facts, these neocons can do whatever the hell they want in the name of terror with you as their sucker
      • hufflepuff17, on 07/08/2008, -2/+4Are you seriously retarded? Do you want to believe it was an inside job because you want to believe the government is all powerful and controls everything? that is what i think it is. Why can't you believe what the government said about 9/11 as truth? Why do people have to believe there is always a secret plot? Because they don't want to believe the government is telling the truth, that's why.
      • lebsoljah, on 07/08/2008, -2/+4It's also a fact that Americans will never accept that 9/11 was an inside job even if proof was right in front of their face... No don't blame the government, blame the neocons.
  • felman87, on 07/08/2008, -5/+74Mission Accomplished!!!
  • gr00vy, on 07/08/2008, -4/+9This is why the attack on Iran will be a surprise.
  • Zhang5, on 07/08/2008, -5/+6. . . and nobody is surprised!
  • D3ADBOLT, on 07/08/2008, -21/+7No it wasn't. It was done to protect your right to post this pointless drivel to stupid social network site so you can jerk off to all the diggs you get from all the other retard truthers that agree with you.
    • ericmerrill, on 07/08/2008, -0/+10Yeah, we need that oil to power our computers.
      • regeya, on 07/08/2008, -5/+1Well, of course not, but those of you whose grid power is generated by natural gas, I suppose, are just as "guilty" as those of us who drive to and from work every day of the rape and pillage of Iraq. Where there is oil, there tends to be natural gas.
      • revisrev, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1No way regeya, I got me a prototype XO with the wind up generator...
    • Nick22, on 07/08/2008, -2/+4Ya im sure all you americans would be constantly attacked by terrorists and you would all be slaves to muslim extremists if iraq wasnt invaded.

      Moron.
  • sixsixsixtimer, on 07/08/2008, -17/+1The Iraq war is misguided, but an easier way to withdraw would be to just transfer the troops to Iran where there is a grave threat to the free world.
  • alexismyhomeboi, on 07/08/2008, -8/+2I thought this was an Onion news article.
  • Bagrad, on 07/08/2008, -9/+4In other related news, turns out the sky is blue !
  • johnsojc, on 07/08/2008, -40/+41You are all retards. You really think a country with 25% of world's oil is not going to drill for oil once it starts stabilizing? Big oil companies=modern technology to drill oil! And Exxon is the only American company listed. Get the ***** out of here. The idiots on Digg really piss me off.

    I am guessing these are the reasons you are voting Democrat too:
    http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Why_I_m_Voting_D ...
    • sum33t, on 07/08/2008, -6/+14Good job trying to promote your own submission.
    • thebrokenlight, on 07/08/2008, -8/+3Yet people are still digging him up. o.O

      You all really are retards.
    • jlfb, on 07/08/2008, -8/+8Thanks for the link, I buried your asinine submission.
    • johnsojc, on 07/08/2008, -9/+5I thought I did a great job. :)
    • solid12345, on 07/08/2008, -3/+6Thank god, another lone voice in the night with common sense.

      Who do these liberals think are going to rebuild and operate Iraq's oil wells? The left is always up for nationalizing things until they realize they have no one skilled or the money to run anything.
    • johnsojc, on 07/08/2008, -0/+0Wow. I really need to keep this up. These liberals are too funny.
  • Cockjuice, on 07/08/2008, -9/+2Alert the internets!
  • utahnkid, on 07/08/2008, -13/+26This article was full of lame speculation and absolutely no proof.

    • Garglebutt, on 07/08/2008, -0/+8Show some respect. It referenced a popular movie.
    • skinnypup85, on 07/08/2008, -1/+1Yes, because what the government tells us is always correct, right?
      No need for us to worry. Good ol' Uncle Sam loves to spread democracy(capitalism) to oppressed people. While in our backyard the provisions listed in the Patriot Act violate our constitution, but it is necessary to protect us against "Terrorist", right?
  • vinceislegend, on 07/08/2008, -19/+25Buried as inaccurate.
  • Shadow57, on 07/08/2008, -3/+47Based the price of gas, if we went to Iraq solely for oil, we failed miserably.
    • yellowsnowcone, on 07/08/2008, -4/+11That's because the war was never about cheap gas.

      Most people who say the "war is about oil" believe there was a profit motive. But if that were the case, why spend $800 billion on a war to hand out oil contracts worth just a fraction of that amount? And where is the cheap gas, as you point out?

      But the presence of oil in Iraq made the war possible. Because it gave the neocons their nation-building fantasy ie they could invade Iraq and use the oil revenue to rebuild and remake the country in its own image.

      So yes, oil made the war possible. But it was never about making profits for companies or the economy at large as most people suspect.
      • wufoo, on 07/08/2008, -1/+1A fraction of $800 billion is still a lot of money.
    • hellahyphy, on 07/08/2008, -0/+6I find it a bit ironic. I'm just speculating but this is what I think happened. If I'm wrong tell me because I want to know the truth. We go to war to keep speculation down and to make sure the oil supply is safe. Well we borrow money from the federal reserve to pay for the war and the value of the dollar decreases ultimately making gas more expensive.
    • SpeedSteamBoat, on 07/08/2008, -1/+12Last I checked the oil companies where posting record profits, and they didn't give a ***** what YOU paid at the pump. Now this has happened.

      Newsflash: The war being "about oil" doesn't mean it was "about oil for make benefit of the great American public." It means Bush and all his friends have been ***** deep in the oil industry for decades, and, as a direct result of all of this, they stand to gain greatly financially when they almost certainly return to that industry next year.

      I'm no extremist. I won't say this was "the plan" from the beginning and the sole motive for starting the war. The sad truth is that almost NO ONE can tell you why we started this war. But just as surely as I reject the idea that oil was the sole motive I reject the naive notion that it had absolutely nothing to do with it and never crossed the mind of anyone in the saintly Bush admin.

      When men involved in oil plan to invade one the most oil rich nations in the world for any reason of course oil would be a part of the discussion, and by all reasonable analysis of the evidence it's completely fair to say it was likely part of the motive as well.
    • JamesDiggem, on 07/08/2008, -1/+5"WE" didn't start this war to make money on the oil... those with their hands in the oil industry did. They are the ones profiting from this war.
  • schmitey, on 07/08/2008, -3/+10Most Americans could care less as long as it keeps their gas prices down so they can keep driving to soccer practice in that Ford Excursion. Ignorance is bliss as long as we continue to get what we want....and politicians know it.
    • revisrev, on 07/08/2008, -2/+3I think you may have gotten just a bit too Jaded... right now SUV sales are way down and in my area there's a freakin' waiting list for the Prius. I'm not too wealthy, but god bless $4 gas... can we get $5 gas soon? Just kidding about god, not the gas.
  • Marijuana, on 07/08/2008, -1/+3SURPRISE IRAN!!!!!! or not...
  • hufflepuff17, on 07/08/2008, -13/+3Um, no duh! But not in the way all you idiots think. Cause have you seen gas prices? Yeah thought so. If we had let that man harbor terrorists any longer they would have gotten control of the oil and the oil all over the middle east and cripple the economy of the world, not just our economy. So yeah, think wat you want but if the radicals ever get control of the middle eastern oil supplies we are all screwed. So looks like I'm burying this stupid article.
    • Delphium226, on 07/08/2008, -1/+1The terrorists weren't in Iraq until we caused chaos and let them in. Wake the ***** up from your ignorance.
    • lhbaker, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Sorry, but the radicals HAVE gained control of the oil supplies, and they are us.
  • croxlol, on 07/08/2008, -6/+6Everybody knew that it was all about oil...
    Do you think that Bush would only attack Iraq to make the world a better place?
    Wake up US!
    The only ones that didnt knew what was it all about were you....!
  • minox, on 07/08/2008, -5/+25So it was an America, Dutch, French, and English conspiracy all along!
    • regeya, on 07/08/2008, -3/+7Heh, I wonder how many of the commenters on this thread won't get that...sad, really. Some of them seem to think that the only country that was EVER involved in the invasion was Iraq as well...
      • SaperKain, on 07/08/2008, -2/+3Wow you are so smart. So much smarter than any of us really. I mean… wow… can you like pick the next president for us too and like solve all of our problems. Thanks in advance your holiness.
      • regeya, on 07/08/2008, -1/+1Heh SaperKain, bitter much?

        IT'S ALL ABOUT OIL! THAT'S WHY THE U.S. WENT TO WAR, TO GET CHEAP OIL! FOR THE DUTCH!

        ...

        Seriously, if you guys don't get it, maybe someone else SHOULD pick the next president for you. Half the country seemed to think that Bush was a great choice...TWICE...maybe those anti-democracy folks are right. Maybe y'all ARE too dumb to pick a leader.
  • Albear89, on 07/08/2008, -10/+4The Jew run media!

    I'm joking
  • utahnkid, on 07/08/2008, -10/+23So they cite the fact that oil companies are making record profits as reason alone to justify such a ludicrous claim.

    Yeah because it's not like world demand isn't at an all time high or anything..

    And don't let the fact that only ONE company listed was American affect your POV.

    I guess logic won't work here, this is Bush bashin' time! YEEE HAAAA!!!
    • regeya, on 07/08/2008, -3/+8Yeah, I'm surprised to see such shallow analysis from Bill Moyers. I mean, you ignore that Iraq was a multinational effort, you ignore that three of the four named oil companies are foreign companies, you ignore that China's pumping some of that oil, you ignore that many of the allegations made by the U.S. have ended up being TRUE, ignore that Iraq served, to a certain extent, as a DEstabilizing element in the region; and finally, ignore Zalmay Khalilzad's role in pushing the U.S. and other countries toward deposing Saddam Hussein, and it looks like it was all about oil!

      Doubtless Iraq would have been left alone had it been merely because Saddam was an evil man, but yes, it's overly simplistic to claim the war was merely over oil and/or dollar hegemony.
      • SpeedSteamBoat, on 07/08/2008, -1/+1"Multinational effort" HAH!

        The "Coallition of the Willing" was and remains a total and utter joke. It's damn near a farce.

        I don't mean to disparage the efforts and sacrifices of soldiers from other nations who went to Iraq, but the US was the one who stirred up and ultimately orchestrated this whole mess with troop and equipment deployments far out weighing those of the other coalition members to match. The coalition was ultimately just a tool the US used to give the war an air of credibility.

        Otherwise, I agree with you that their were many reasons for the war, and it's just as foolish to claim oil was the whole reason as it is to say it had nothing to do with it at all.
      • JBrown99, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Agred 100%. Thank God not everyone in this country is as dumb as the majority of people on Digg.
      • skinnypup85, on 07/08/2008, -0/+0In comparison to the civil war, all parties had their interest in war. Rather it was Oil, Liberation, Weapons of Mass Destruction, the fact remains that we invaded under false pretenses. If the citizens of Iraq truly wanted to overthrow Saddam they would have. But, they didn't. Instead, it required false allegations to push the button. Where are the WMD's? Supposedly Iraq's leaders were a threat to our national security. You fail to realize many "terrorist" organizations wanted Saddam dead, especially Bin Laden. Iraq's leaders were just money hungry businessmen. What is the difference in comparison to our true intentions?
  • TheShero, on 07/08/2008, -8/+1GOOD MORNING!
  • chrissku, on 07/08/2008, -8/+1No *****?
  • westvaco, on 07/08/2008, -9/+4I would suggest to the American and British people that, for their continued peace of mind, they discontinue the inquiry into the real reasons for the Iraqi invasion. George Bush and Tony Blair did it for you, and they did not admit to the true reason for the invasion so that you would not feel uncomfortable about proceeding with it, even though it was essential to maintaining your high standard of living for a little while longer. As the petroleum age draws to an end, America and Britain will take whatever steps are necessary to gain access to the declining global oil reserves. In the years to come, there will be more invasions like that of Iraq. At some point, it will be obvious to everyone that the reason for these invasions – these resource wars – is oil. But it will always, and certainly initially, be easier to justify them when they are wrapped in the swaddling cloth of national defence (fighting terrorism, eliminating weapons of mass destruction) and liberty (freeing people from dictators, establishing democracy, promoting free trade). By placing Iraqi oil under Anglo-American control, the US and Britain ensure that Iraqi oil will be available to the US and to Britain, rather than to China (and India, and Russia, and any other country you wish to mention). From the viewpoint of prolonging the high Anglo-American standard of living for a few years more, the invasion of Iraq was absolutely necessary. George Bush and Tony Blair did a fine job of accomplishing the invasion of Iraq without requiring Americans and Britons to feel bad about doing so. They have read their Machiavelli well. They told white lies not just to rally strong emotional support for the invasion, but also so that Americans and Britons could continue to live at a high standard of living – and in a fairyland of high-minded principles – for a little while longer.
    • slyzxx, on 07/08/2008, -5/+2sooo they killed innocent people for us huh ? i don`t want any blood oil thanks.
    • samthurston, on 07/08/2008, -4/+1Peak oil was invented by a "scientist" working for a Shell Oil subsidiary trying to secure uranium mining leases from congress. We have more known and proven reserves now than ever in history. Less than 10% of global fields have been tapped.

      So our economy wasn't about to collapse for lack of oil. The reason we're in this economic ***** has everything to do with the federal reserve mismanaging money, and tremendous deficit spending for the last 40 years running.

      The only thing an invasion for oil would accomplish is direct profiteering for private industry. It obviously hasn't helped the price of gas at the pump.
  • jjgasp, on 07/08/2008, -8/+2hey Diggers, this is old news, it came out at least two weeks ago (though we all knew the truth back in '03)
  • gofalcons, on 07/08/2008, -11/+17"Nuh uh! It's about catching Bin Laden....I mean catching all of the Al Qaeda Terrorists....I mean Saddam's WMDs......I mean a free and safe Iraq.....I mean not losing the security gains that we've made......I mean.........GAY MARRAIGES IS WRONG!!!"
  • mlvassallo, on 07/08/2008, -2/+7When will my gas prices start to fall?
    • tomd123, on 07/08/2008, -1/+6When the CEOs of big gas companies start caring.
    • popfrogs, on 07/08/2008, -0/+3When the speculators get out of the commodities market, or the dollar gains value, whichever comes first.

      Personally I doubt either one will happen this year.
    • spawnfree, on 07/08/2008, -1/+1as soon as stock price criteria works the other way round.
      or hell freezes over.
    • jlfb, on 07/08/2008, -1/+5When you buy a bicycle.
      • kevincw01, on 07/08/2008, -0/+2but my bike doesnt have sirius...or a hemi...or heating and a/c and room to shag and the power to pull pwcs and boats and i cant carry my bike on my bike or my kayak for that matter.
      • mlvassallo, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Or the ability to travel 60 miles in one hour when I need to get to work.
    • PosedMagnet, on 07/08/2008, -2/+0When China stops consuming what they do.

      That's the real reason the prices are high. Not politics, not companies trying to make a profit.

      But consumption.
    • codynyc74, on 07/08/2008, -1/+1PosedMagnet - mr bush is that you?


    • ryptide, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1When people decide the current prices are too high and stop paying.

      Why would prices fall if people will pay $4 a gallon?
      • coyote1284, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Easier said than done. It'd take one or two people from each workplace to buy an old 8+ passenger van to "bus" his coworkers to work. Face it, at this time, there is no viable alternative to gasoline avaiable to the mass market. For the average person, if you're not using petrol, you're not using a car to get where you need to go.
      • lhbaker, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1You respond as though oil follows the laws of supply and demand. The price of petroleum is fixed by a relatively small group of individuals who have the power to increase or decrease supplies at will. Oil prices have doubled in the past year, but demand hasn't adjusted accordingly, nor have supplies. Only the price has changed. Gas could go to $10 and demand wouldn't decrease proportionately, yet the price of everything you buy would more than double. Every time I go to the grocery store, I can see the price of gas reflected in the cost of my food. It's gotten so bad that manufacturers have retooled and are selling products, such as cereal, in smaller portions so that the price increases aren't as obvious.
  • ericjohnson0, on 07/08/2008, -23/+19-Ahem-

    AP Report- 7/6/2008- US removes Uranium from Iraq
    http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1107ap_iraq ...

    "The media have been telling us for years that Saddam had no WMD, so "Bush's War": was based on a "lie." And those who believed Saddam did have WMD or WMD programs were delusional or worse.


    But today, on July 6, 2008, the Associated Press reports that


    Saddam Hussein had a nuclear program
    At the Tuwaitha nuclear complex just south of Baghdad
    Which included 550 metric tons (over 1.2 million pounds) of "yellowcake", or concentrated uranium
    And multiple devices that could be used in a nuclear weapon.


    The AP does not say alleged nuclear program. It does not add "according to military experts." It simply says "Saddam Hussein's nuclear program.""
    • tomd123, on 07/08/2008, -5/+2Ya well the 550 tons were not the grade that is necessary to make dirty bombs.. I heard they were selling that stuff to Canada of all places.
      • britblogger, on 07/08/2008, -2/+1and just who did you hear that from gonzo?
    • NomortaL1, on 07/08/2008, -2/+29Try reading the article. I know it's a lot of words and all that, but persevere till the bitter middle and you will find:

      "Israeli warplanes bombed a reactor project at the site in 1981. Later, U.N. inspectors documented and safeguarded the yellowcake, which had been stored in aging drums and containers since before the 1991 Gulf War. There was no evidence of any yellowcake dating from after 1991, the official said."

      In case your memory needs refreshing, the first US vs Iraq war was in 1991 and there was great worldwide support for it. The next US vs Iraq war was in 2003 and there was not much support for it worldwide (I'm sure you still wonder why).

      I bet the most US people seeing the headlines will think a similar way - "Hey Bush was right".

      So it's going to be yet another wonderful "mission accomplished" by the "news people". Like shooting fish in the barrel.

      Thanks media alright.
      • NomortaL1, on 07/08/2008, -0/+10sorry, heres the news story that i got that from,

        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080706/ap_on_re_mi_ea ...
      • mechnoch, on 07/08/2008, -0/+7WTF is digging you down for clarifying this!?
      • jamdogg, on 07/08/2008, -0/+2Dugg for "persevere till the bitter middle".
      • regeya, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Of course, any evidence that any claims that Saddam was right are just wrong and/or propaganda, and anyone believing those stories are right are sheep.

        And people who get their news from Alternet are smart for doing so, because people who post to Alternet, unlike mainstream media (who are always wrong) are always right.

        Uh-huh!
    • pixelguru, on 07/08/2008, -3/+18FTA: Israeli warplanes bombed a reactor project at the site in 1981. Later, U.N. inspectors documented and safeguarded the yellowcake, which had been stored in aging drums and containers since before the 1991 Gulf War. There was no evidence of any yellowcake dating from after 1991, the official said.

      This is your justification for war? THIS??? A bunch of decades old barely radioactive dirt? I would have loved to see the Bush administration go on the air to sell us a war over that. No, instead he lied to you, and beat that lie into your head so many times that you still believe it to this day - that Saddam Hussein was going to make a nuclear bomb and use it to kill you. It was a lie. A complete and total lie.
      • kevincw01, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1grrr..oh sorry.
      • JBrown99, on 07/08/2008, -0/+0"decades old barely radioactive dirt"? Since when did radioactive material decay in a few decades?
      • pixelguru, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Well, something that has a half-life of 20 years would decay 50% in that amount of time. This dirt, however, was barely radioactive to begin with. The only health concerns about it are possible health risks from prolonged breathing its dust. Iraqis were looting the storage facility and dumping out the dirt to use the barrels as drinking water containers - the barrels were worth more than their contents.
    • KazamaSmokers, on 07/08/2008, -1/+2Eric... dear sweet dim-bulb Eric... read the whole article, honey.
    • Nytrixxx, on 07/08/2008, -1/+1We have been in Iraq for how long???

      And just now we are finding 550 METRIC TONS of concentrated uranium in Tuwaitha nuclear complex JUST SOUTH of Baghdad. Do you f#$king seriously believe that? What a joke! Yeah, because it has taken us this long to finish our search of the f__king Tuwaitha NUCLEAR complex. People believe anything that is thrown up at them. Just another way to justify the money making machine.... that is NOT just about oil. And 99% of the media is NOT your friend.

      Do your homework.
      • regeya, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1"And 99% of the media is NOT your friend."

        Now, that's not true; I don't even know 1% of the media personally.

        Also, 57% of all statistics are fabricated on the spot.

        You should do your homework as well. All the reports I'm seeing state that the U.S. has REMOVED the yellowcake. Not that they JUST FOUND the yellowcake. And yellowcake != enriched. The fear is that, if left in Iraq, it would fall into the wrong hands. The people who hate America don't care if you also hate your government; you're an American and therefore deserve to die. Lots of luck with that!
      • kaplanfx, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Also, we were already aware of this uranium, at least as early as 91' and possibly earlier.
    • sicntired, on 07/13/2008, -0/+1Who built the reactor?Who is building one in Iran and shouting how terrible them having it is?Open your eyes people.Your government sees you as a number and nothing else.It's all about the numbers.Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean there isn't someone out to screw me.
  • mrzack, on 07/08/2008, -16/+69/11 = NEOCON Inside Job. nuff said, gg, no re.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 150 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.