Powell says U.S. need for oil influenced actions in Iraq

[sally343434]

Powell says U.S. need for oil influenced actions in Iraq

Secretary of State Colin Powell described the U.S. need for oil as a motivating factor in the Bush administration's decision to overthrow Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein and seek his replacement by a democratic government.

Powell, in an interview with Laura Ingraham on the Westwood One Radio Network, said the U.S. needs good relations with countries that can help it meet its energy demands.

"We need stable regimes in this part of the world who will be partners and friends of ours, because the fact of the matter is we do rely on imported oil to fuel our economy and to fuel our nation," Powell said in the interview.

"In Iraq, we had an unstable regime, a dictatorial regime that was ready to be pushed aside," he said.

"That's not sending our troops overseas for oil," Powell said. "That's sending our troops overseas to put in place a democratic nation rested on a foundation of openness and human rights that will be a friend and partner of the United States."

[against all enemies]

1. Powell- Your credibility is gone.

Now go home, please.

[FreakinDJ]

2. Got a link for that

[sundancekid]

4. had same question, but found here:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2001935951_iraqdig22.html

(toward the very bottom of the page)

[mistertrickster]

3. He figures if he tells the truth for once, people will start believing him

again.

We invaded for the oil--really!? I thought it was for the kinky prison sex . . .

[Kagemusha]

5. It's not for oil. It's for a friendly country that'll sell us oil. Lots.

Did he make this argument with a straight face?...

[Old and In the Way]

6. Did he mention that at the UN?

First I've heard of this.....from the administration.

What a bullshit reason. How much would $200BB buy in the open market? Was this worth killing 30,000 Iraqi's and 750+ American soldiers? Was this war for oil worth our international reputation?

Will Powell have a problem when China or Russia or Western Europe invades an oil producer to create a new government that is "democratic and friendlier to their oil needs"?

[Massacure]

7. I like Powell

He's the one person in the Bush Administration I like.

I'm surprised he actually said that though. It's a pretty damning statement as far as Bush is concerned.

[kvnf]

8. Wow

Colin Powell...what am I to believe from you these days??

I think Colin Powell just invented a way to appease both sides at the same time.

OMG...that's GOOD. Read it...it's an affirmation of your beliefs whether your with Bush or against him. It's GENIOUS!!!!!!!!!!

[Munnin]

9. Well DUH!

Why would he even feel the need to point out something so obvious?

[oblivious]

10. I think we can add the following quotes to this thread for the record.

Just so there is no doubt that this war was about oil.

Britain: Foreign secretary admits oil central to war vs. Iraq
14 January 2003

Foreign Secretary Jack Straw has admitted that oil is a key factor in the UK?s willingness to participate in a US-led war against Iraq.

...One such strategic priority was to ?bolster the security of British and global energy supplies?, Straw told the 150-plus assembled diplomats.

The Guardian newspaper reported on the ambassadors meeting that ?some ministers and officials in Whitehall say privately that oil is more important in the calculation than weapons of mass destruction. These ministers and officials have pointed to the instability of current oil sources?the Middle East, Caspian region and Algeria?and the need for secure alternatives.?

...The Blair government has similarly resolved that the issue of oil supplies must be settled by force of arms.

...Blair is seeking a quid pro quo arrangement with the US whereby in return for supporting the latter?s military take-over of the Middle East, British capital is given a commanding slice of Iraq?s oil reserves.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2003/jan2003/strw-j14.shtml

But in the same month, after telling diplomats it was about oil, this is what Blair released for the consumption of the masses:

"Let me deal with the conspiracy theory idea that this is somehow to do with oil. There is no way whatever if oil were the issue that it would not be infinitely simpler to cut a deal with Saddam...." (London Times 1/15/03)

Here's quite an informative article on the value of Iraqi reserves. The value of 3 trillion was estimated at $25/barrel. At today's rates, WOW! This explains everything.

Oil in Iraq: the heart of the Crisis

We will assume the level of Iraqi reserves at 250 billion barrels (a very conservative estimate) and recovery rates at 50% (also a very conservative estimate). Under those conditions, recoverable Iraqi oil would be worth altogether about $3.125 trillion. Assuming production costs of $1.50 a barrel (a high-end figure), total costs would be $188 billion, leaving a balance of $2.937 trillion as the difference between costs and sales revenues. Assuming a 50/50 split with the government and further assuming a production period of 50 years, the company profits per year would run to $29 billion. That huge sum is two-thirds of the $44 billion total profits earned by the world?s five major oil companies combined in 2001. If higher assumptions are used, annual profits might soar to as much as $50 billion per year.

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/oil/2002/12heart.htm

You could argue that it's not greed at stake here, but survival, since developed countries cannot sustain their way of life without plentiful, cheap oil. If it had been presented honestly like that, I wouldn't have been as critical of the aggression against Saddam. I mean, if the guy really is out to destroy your economy, you can't just stand there and take it. I just hate being lied to, treated like a gullible piece of shit. And of course, I have to believe a deal could have been struck with Saddam without destroying the country. They had a good relationship for two decades or more, and before the Gulf War, Saddam seems to be asking for better relations with the US. But that wasn't good enough. The oil men who took over in 2001 wanted it all.

At least the Polish government was honest about its reasons for joining the coalition. Both the foreign minister and the president admitted they sent troops with the understanding that Polish oil companies would get some of the oil. The subcontracts for machinery and construction were nice, but they were there for the oil. No bullshit. Honest thieves if you like.

edit: italics (I always forget to preview)