Letters to the Editor
-
to: Arne
Yes, I am well aware of the Eisenhower-sanctioned 1953 CIA coup that overthrew the Iranian President (Mossadegh?) and put the Shah in power.
That was definitely motivated by OIL, as Iran had just nationalized its reserves.
OK. I am not denying that US policy is in part directed by OIL.
However, I am saying I am skeptical that our current occupation of Iraq is motivated by OIL. It just doesn't make sense to me. Why a full-scale invasion of Iraq? Why not a CIA coup to topple his regime? Was Husseins grip on power more solid than in Iran? Why Iraq then? Why not Iran in 2003? Or why not Saudi Arabia? They are a less densely populated nation that has even MORE OIL than Iraq. Seems like that would make a better strategic target than Iraq if you're after OIL. And they even had the war gift-wrapped: 19 of the 9/11 highjackers were Saudi citizens if I remember correctly.
I guess it comes down to whether or not you believe the Bush administration really is that stupid... to think that the American public & the rest of the world would tolerate such a naked grab for resources in the form of an unending occupation of Iraqi territory.
As incompetent as they are, they know exactly what the bottom line is in Iraq: War for profit's sake.
Hey, if history proves me wrong, I'll admit it. But it's like Lenin said, (thinking of the Big Lebowski here) you look to see who profits, and there is your culprit.