Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
so, the presence of oil was irrelevant to the decision cos the US would have got the oil anyway and inaction would have been cheaper. No, the Senate was bounced by a clever pr campaign and an ambassador's daughter who lied.
In what way does any of that work out that way if Kuwait's chief export is dried fish?

I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Mon May 30th, 2011 at 02:53:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That depends on how many of their fishing boats are owned by United Fish.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Mon May 30th, 2011 at 03:22:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Whilst I agree with the second paragraph 100% in that the re-invasion would never have happened without the oil, I still feel that it was more about how the USA (and world opinion) was bounced into doing the right thing against their will. After all, Iraq was a US asset. Saddam was their guy to the extent that he'd already asked permission to invade and received it beforehand.

just like that

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Mon May 30th, 2011 at 03:26:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
So it was about the oil.

Since the diary takes no position at all on how the details worked out, I still do not see how it contradicts any claim in the diary.

I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Mon May 30th, 2011 at 03:42:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display: