Quote:

Rob, I wish I could help you with the anti-Bush perspective of Bush's hidden motive for invasion.
We've all heard "blood for oil" and "war profiteering" and so forth. But as you say, none of those make sense.

Yeah, sure, we'll spend a trillion on an Iraq war, just so Bush and Cheney can make a few million in contract kickbacks from Halliburton. Makes sense.

And if it was "blood for oil" Iraq would have to give us every drop of oil for the next 30 years, and we might then break EVEN !




If Halliburton and the oil indutry were the ones paying for the invasion, it would not break even. The war would be a huge loss making exercise.

Instead, they got a 100% subsidy from the US taxpayer. The subsidy incidentally went directly to hi-tech companies like Lockheed Martin and Boeing. But the oil industry benefited from it. And the taxpayers paid for it.

With that subsidy, all business in the new oil rich market in Iraq is pure profit.

But that is a peripheral benefit to big business. The real benefit is to American security - access to strategic oil reserves.

Quote:

MisterJLA said:

Quote:

The Chinese People's Liberation Army cannot successfully wage an extended war for the same reaosn the Japanese lost WW2. Neither of them had a strategic oil reserve.

And now the US has one, a big one, just to the east of Saudi Arabia.



Sounds good to me!



You bet. Sounds good to most Americans, put like that. Makes sense, doesn't it?

Pimping my site, again.

http://www.worldcomicbookreview.com