Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Palast: leaked State Dept memo - why we invaded Iraq

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
welshTerrier2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 10:22 PM
Original message
Palast: leaked State Dept memo - why we invaded Iraq
Edited on Thu Aug-03-06 10:23 PM by welshTerrier2
well, most of us knew it's always been about oil ... but Palast's recount provides some very interesting details and even ties the 2002 coup in Venezuela directly back to the US State Department ...

the following article (an excerpt from Palast's latest book) is very worth reading ... there's also an audio link to an interview between RFK Jr. and Greg Palast ...

audio link: http://www.gregpalast.com/podcasting/radiointerviews/Pa...


source: http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/contributors/338

With Saddam out of control, jerking markets up and down, the price of controlling the price was getting just too high. Saddam drove the oil boys bonkers. For example, Saddam's games pushed the State Department, disastrously, to launch, in April 2002, a coup d'etat in Venezuela.

This could not stand. Saddam delighted in playing cat-and-mouse with the USA and our oil majors. Unfortunately for him, he wasn't playing with mice, but a much bigger and unforgiving breed of rodents. Saddam was asking for it. It was time for a "military assessment." The CFR concluded:

Saddam Hussein has demonstrated a willingness to threaten to use the oil weapon to manipulate oil markets... United States should conduct an immediate pol icy review toward Iraq, including military, energy, economic, and political / diplomatic assessments.

The true motive to invade Iraq, Saddam's "manipulation of oil markets," was there, but not yet, in April 2001, the official excuse. <skip>

And whose plan was it? I knew the membership of the Baker-CFR group was Big Oil and its retainers. But I was curious to know who put up the cash for drafting the extravagant report that was so protective of OPEC and Saudi interests. This document was, after all, the outline on which the Bush administration drew its grand design for energy, from Iraq to California to Venezuela. According to Jaffe, the cost of this exercise in Imperialism Lite was funded by "the generous support of Khalid al-Turki" of Saudi Arabia.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Cocoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 10:34 PM
Response to Original message
1. I don't trust most of Palast's reporting
Edited on Thu Aug-03-06 10:34 PM by Cocoa
this article is a good example.

It's too hard to figure out what he is asserting and what his evidence is.

It seems written so as to make it hard to analyze critically.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ouabache Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 11:16 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. I could take Palast more seriously if he didn't wear goofy hats
Makes him look like Drdge. ugh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Igel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-04-06 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #1
7. The evidence seems to be a report submitted to the
State Department.

The assertion is that it constituted the real reason for the Iraq invasion. (As though there were just one, Sam Tanenhaus knocked that bit of thinking for a loop.)

The logic seems to be that since there's a report, and it was in writing, and maybe even read, it must have been accepted as the premise for any actions. After all, that conclusion agrees with what Palast thinks was the reason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oversea Visitor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 11:26 PM
Response to Original message
3. So no more Saddam
What the fuck happen to oil price.

Well the sure did not acheive much if we look at the price today and the price when he was around.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
welshTerrier2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 11:58 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. what they've achieved is ...
Edited on Thu Aug-03-06 11:59 PM by welshTerrier2
all time record oil profits ... we may not be very happy but somebody sure is ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oversea Visitor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-04-06 12:19 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Well I guess Saddam
did not have a big DICK.

He try doing some screw up

Looking at condition now, I say it is totally screwed up.

Sure need a big DICK for a big screw up
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mountainman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-04-06 09:36 AM
Response to Original message
6. In order to make this plan work they needed a second Pearl Harbor.
Is it so hard to imagine that the oil interests worked with the Saudis to make 9/11 happen? That is my feeling. Then comes the phony reasons to go to war which are believed because 9/11 happened and the lie connecting it with Saddam.

The problem is that they were so over confident that they could kick ass in Iraq and have their way. But the insurgents stopped them in their tracks. They still think they can pull it off and that's the reason for "stay the course."


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Sep 01st 2014, 03:01 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC