Talk about defining missions...

I've always thought it odd the oil pimps who slithered into power in 2000 didn't just state from the get-go the main reason we are in Iraq: their desire to control the untapped Iraqi oil reserves. Every other purported reason simply lacks the lure and the stink of big money. (Evil dictators? Genocide? Who gives a shit as long as it is not happening above a pool of oil?). Most industries proudly trumpet their quest for market power and control - excuse me, their "corporate vision"... why are these oilmen so secretive? Surely in their minds they're doing America - and their balance sheets - a great patriotic service. Why do they think Americans wouldn't embrace the truth? Or is it just the pathological need for governments to lie?

Note I say control the Iraqi reserves, not pump them... not yet. The oil industry is delighted with the current grip they have on supply and price. And they were quite right in their assumption that demand for gasoline is inelastic in the US, whatever the exorbitant price at the pump. Sitting on this vast - and probably last - reserve insures they will retain this grip until the oil age - or the dollar - collapses. What's good for big oil is good for America! Right?? Piss off the rest of the world? Who cares what those terrorist-loving wimps think!!

Such little confidence in your life's mission! Why didn't they just tell the US public what a valuable service they were providing, doing their bit to prop up the overconsuming American way for another generation?

"No blood for oil!" has such a hollow ring as you gas up your SUV.

There are literally tens of millions of Arabs in the region (not to mention the Iranians, Palestinians, etc.) who think that the Americans are only interested in two things in the Middle East: oil and Israel.

I think they have arrived at the correct conclusion.

That conclusion on the part of Middle Easterners is a significant indicator of our foreign policy ineptitude, both diplomatically and strategically.

I would add that the other policy reason for Rove/Bush War is to further (and consolidate) domestic Republic Party Power perpetually, via permanent war. They are succeeding. If they can't get us to Iran after Iraq, they'll find a fight somewhere in order to continue their assault on the Constitution of the US. The current arguments over The Surge are their way of playing the clock - serves their purpose beautifully. They will devise another delaying tactic as soon as they need to.

The only way to stop this is for the citizenry to keep saying NO. We have to step up the pressure on Congress and the Judiciary to execute the will of We the People.

The premise of why Iraq invasion took place has moved several times and ways since the original "Saddam has WMD ability,is allied with OBL and is a bad dictator and terror backer" and the factual record clearly never supported any of that hokum. Well...Saddam is now dead and Iraq is at what stage of D.Cheney's "last throes"?

Those American super-bases,the big Baghdad embassy and the plain intent for the USAF to remain Iraq's defacto air force for a very long time to come all point to the early and clear intent of Bush2WH to remain in Iraq for many years(decades?) to come. The Iraq Oil Law the Bush2WH has fingerprints all over is one big reason. The desire to stride about the ME with viable means to inflict mayhem on other "non-cooperative" ME leaders,governments and populations another. Nothing new in this as it has been an intrinsic part of American ME policy ever since the British pulled out of ME. However prior to G.W Bush and Dick Cheney the idea of occupation of an ME country was not undertaken. The Bush2WH went beyond any prior Open Door frontier,any switch the leader or undermine the government and put in the one you prefer. In 1953 in Iran the Americans went along with taking out the leader when he failed to appease them. Saddam was an American ME creature who USA lost control of. Had he went with a Marcos or Suharto style of play-along likely enough he would still be alive,in power and the Western petro interests would be raking in Iraqi oil revenue.

It is difficult to see how the DEMS truly will be able to walk away from the idea of American presence and control in Iraq. Traditionally both national parties have endorsed some form of Pax Americana in ME petro matters since taking up where the British left off. Those super-bases in particular are very much intended for a long stay. As is USAF being the only air force flying in Iraqi air space for a long time to come. The DEMS are fully up against some deeply entrenched and deeply rooted militarism,corporatism and globalism interests.

G.W.Bush,D.Cheney and the AEI,Heritage and PNAC types they front are digging in for political attrition to win. The DC DEMS will be hard pressed to fully unplug American meddling in the ME. Invading Iraq had little or nothing to do with the GWOT Bush2WH was selling the American people. It did have to do with setting an example of Saddam falling from power. Of putting in place western style oil control. Of putting up a big notice to any other ME players the Americans could fuck up things for failure to fall in line. Lebanon last summer got the message via Israeli militarism. Syria and Iran are very much in the cross-hairs now.

Americans perhaps are about to discover more about American interests and desires in ME then they ever have since 1950's. All those American super-carriers exist to inflict punishment. At great yearly cost. American public opinion vs a "small but powerful group" perhaps should be amended with also vs. the militarists,corporatists and globalists who like idea of the "big stick" in ME affairs being in American hands. They are not about to walk out of ME gently or meekly. Ask D.Cheney.

The Iraqi people have a different take on that. Many Americans do as well. It is surely a real and grave risk the Americans will run out of treasure and blood to shed for it. It is certain the Iraqis are bearing a terrible cost every day.I hope the Kagans,Kristols and Cheneys fail. I sincerely do.They will not admit to any failure or wrongness of policy short of total political banishment. The death dealing,control of power and authoritarism they condone and seek will not end otherwise.