Re: Just a reminder-08
Ok we will start counting bodies, lets add these bodies to the mix, ill put these at the foot of the
President and his cronies in the administration for getting us in Iraq under false pretenses. In other words lying about WMD,s and all along it was about
OIL.
As of January 26 2007
(U.S. Deaths Confirmed By The DoD= 3063) (TOTAL - NON-MORTAL CASUALTIES= 47,657)
Uk deaths= 130
Wolfowitz: "Iraq War Was About Oil"
George Wright for The Guardian UK
The Guardian Wednesday 04 June 2003
Oil was the main reason for military action against Iraq, a leading White House hawk has claimed, confirming the worst fears of those opposed to the US-led war.
The US deputy defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz - who has already undermined Tony Blair's position over weapons of mass destruction (WMD) by describing them as a "bureaucratic" excuse for war - has now gone further by claiming the real motive was that Iraq is "swimming" in oil.
The latest comments were made by Mr Wolfowitz in an address to delegates at an Asian security summit in Singapore at the weekend, and reported today by German newspapers Der Tagesspiegel and Die Welt.
Asked why a nuclear power such as North Korea was being treated differently from Iraq, where hardly any weapons of mass destruction had been found, the deputy defence minister said: "Let's look at it simply. The most important difference between North Korea and Iraq is that economically, we just had no choice in Iraq. The country swims on a sea of oil."
Correction is posted at the bottom of this page.
Correction posted here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Print/0,3858,4684865,00.html
A report which was posted on our website on June 4 under the heading "Wolfowitz: Iraq war was about oil" misconstrued remarks made by the US deputy defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz, making it appear that he had said that oil was the main reason for going to war in Iraq. He did not say that.
He said, according to the Department of Defence website, "The ... difference between North Korea and Iraq is that we had virtually no economic options with Iraq because the country floats on a sea of oil. In the case of North Korea, the country is teetering on the edge of economic collapse and that I believe is a major point of leverage whereas the military picture with North Korea is very different from that with Iraq." The sense was clearly that the US had no economic options by means of which to achieve its objectives, not that the economic value of the oil motivated the war. The report appeared only on the website and has now been removed.
Posted by Lisa at June 05, 2003 12:35 PM |
