For Bush, "victory" means staying in Iraq, Redux


2 comments posted
Staying in Iraq

Staying = conquest. The same as when Julius Caesar's armies went to France, Germany, Britain and stayed there. Obviously the goal here is to control the oil, as you point out. I've assumed that to be the case since the beginning, but certainly it has become confusing as to exactly what the motives have been. (Cindy Sheehan: "What noble cause?")

The second goal of staying is to establish bases from which the U.S. can threaten other countries in the region, so it can control their oil, too.

I believe what happened was that the Neocons realized that oil was going to become scarce over the next ten to fifteen years (estimates vary). At that point, they figured, all the major powers -- Russia, China, India, maybe Japan -- would rush to the Middle East and try to take over. Bush just wanted to get a jump on the others.

Aside from niceties like international law, morality, the U.S.'s reputation, etc., etc., the big problem with the Neocon approach is that the U.S. isn't capable of accomplishing it. The Persian Gulf region is too far away from the U.S. for even the world's most high-tech military to conquer and hold.

It wouldn't help to use nukes, either, because the area would be left dangerously radioactive. Nevertheless I think the next component of their plan is to use a nuclear weapon somewhere (but not near any important oil field) in order to show the oil countries that he is serious about using his nukes. Then, so goes the concept, they will have to bow down and cede control of the oil to the U.S.

I don't think their plan has any chance of working, but it will sure make a horrible mess of, well, almost everything.

Ralph's picture
Posted by Ralph (not verified) on 26 February 2007 - 2:55pm
That could very well be it

There's no question that oil is a vital interest not just to the US but to the world, and a major disruption in oil extraction could toss the world into a great depression like no other. It's the way they're going about it that disturbs me, for it embraces the idea that it's better to be the neighborhood bully than the neighborhood leader, better to have people fear you than like you. That's a total corruption of the American ideals that we as people at least strive for (even as our government has failed in various regions again and again, especially in the Middle East).

And then there's all the Armageddon talk from the religious fundamentalists who make up Bush's political base as well as Osama bin Laden's political base. That's scary.

media girl's picture
Posted by media girl on 27 February 2007 - 8:59am