Mike the Mad Biologist

Bush Can Just Make You Crazy

By way of Litbrit at Shakespeare’s Sister, I came across a Greg Palast article about possible motivations for a troop increase in Iraq. Palast writes (bold in original; italics mine):

Here’s my question: Who asked the waiter to deliver this dish? Who asked for the 21,000 soldiers?

We know the US military didn’t ask for the 21,000 troops. (Outgoing commander General George Casey called for a troop reduction.)

We know the Iraqi government didn’t ask for the 21,000 troops. (Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki is reportedly unhappy about a visible increase in foreign occupiers).

So who wants the occupation to continue? The answer is in Riyadh. When the King of Saudi Arabia hauled Dick Cheney before his throne on Thanksgiving weekend, the keeper of America’s oil laid down the law to Veep: the US will not withdraw from Iraq.

According to Nawaf Obaid, a Saudi who signals to the US government the commands and diktats of the House of Saud, the Saudis are concerned that a US pull-out will leave their Sunni brothers in Iraq to be slaughtered by Shia militias. More important, the Saudis will not tolerate a Shia-majority government in Iraq controlled by the Shia mullahs of Iran. A Shia combine would threaten Saudi Arabia’s hegemony in the OPEC oil cartel.

In other words, it’s about the oil.

I have no idea whether this is correct. One should never underestimate the Bush administration’s incompetence. On the other hand, if this were to be substantiated, would you really be surprised? That’s one (of many) maddening about this administration: they have been so disingenuous, that even crazy talk starts to sound not so crazy. When the fantastic is considered serious, it’s hard to know what sanity even means.

Comments

  1. #1 SkookumPlanet
    January 12, 2007

    In early December a friend of mine flagged Cheney’s Thanksgiving trip. “Just wait” he said. “That’s going to prove to be a very important trip. Something critical was discussed then.”

    I like Cheney’s pose at Shakespeare’s Sister . How often do you think he is that rapt in D.C.?

  2. #2 Nick
    January 12, 2007

    W is just as much a puppet as Maliki.. The sad thing is, all these events were planned in meticulous detail years ago. What we now see as plot twists and news-flashes, are in fact just a scenario..

  3. #3 bigT
    January 12, 2007

    I don’t find it all that far fetched. Considering that the Saudis literally have us over a barrel, we have to be careful how we deal with them. There are two ways they could hurt us, (1) deliberately
    , by cutting back on oil exports, or (2) worse -if the regime were to somehow fail major oil supply disruptions would wreck havoc on the world economy. Either happening would be unpleasant, although in the long run, it might get us moving towards a post-oil economy sooner.

  4. #4 XPM
    January 12, 2007

    I have a dreadful feeling that a “post-oil” economy will in practise prove to be a coal economy.

  5. #5 Buck Turgidson
    January 14, 2007

    Its time to end this thing.

    The Japanese in World War II were just as fanatical as the Muslims, perhaps more so.

    Hiroshima and Nagasaki changed their tune!!!

    Tell them its time to add Mecca and Medina to the list.

  6. #6 SkookumPlanet
    January 15, 2007

    I’ve involuntarily become a channel for a number of G.I.s killed in Saipan, Iwo Jima, Guadalcanal, Midway, and others I can’t quite make out. They have a message for ‘ol buck. . .

    If we were just waitin’ for the bomb, them idiots in Washington coulda figured out some way to get it to Japan without slaughtering marines marchin’ across every hell hole in the Pacific. They shoulda told us somethin’. Hell, we woulda figured out a better way and we woulda got it there too. Swimmin’ it there woulda been easier than what we did. S.N.A.F.U. buddy, just another S.N.A.F.U.

  7. #7 Coin
    January 15, 2007

    I have a dreadful feeling that a “post-oil” economy will in practise prove to be a coal economy.

    Unless America can get over its fear of nuclear power, pretty much yes.

    But as much as that sucks from an environmental perspective, from a short term and political standpoint it’s not so bad. We’ve got domestic coal.

The site is undergoing maintenance presently. Commenting has been disabled. Please check back later!