frogcycle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-25-06 12:02 PM
Original message |
Has anyone else pointed out that bush... |
|
Edited on Wed Oct-25-06 12:03 PM by frogcycle
in his "press conference" today not once, but TWICE, acknowledged that OIL is the real reason we're there?
He painted the spectre of "the terrorists" gaining control of "vast oil fields" and being able to "blackmail" America.
I had to turn off the press conference before it was done, but none of the so-called "Fourth Estate" had so far seemed to react to that.
To me, this is the "smoking gun". After all the rhetoric about regime change and WMD and shoving democracy down their throats (oops, I mean "freeing" them) blah, blah, blah...
HE CAME OUT AND ADMITTED WHAT WE KNEW ALL ALONG! The goal is to control the oil fields. Period. End of discussion. Nothing else matters; everything else is a smoke screen.
They have run out of excuses for prolonging this thing, and have finally decided to use the one that they think will panic the electorate in these final 13 days.
Somebody tell me if I'm off base, but I think this is the latest attempt at an "October Surprise"; he "floated" it to see if there would be a backlash, and if they don't get called out on it pronto, it is going to become the "talking points" for the next 13 days.
|
Vexatious Ape
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-25-06 12:07 PM
Response to Original message |
|
I won't hold my breath waiting to see any reporters doing any 'man on the street' thing, asking joe blow at the gas station. "So how many of our boys in uniform should die for you to fill the tank on that stupid SUV?"
|
colorado_ufo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-25-06 12:08 PM
Response to Original message |
|
almost the very first comment * made after the invasion of Iraq was to assure us that the oilfields were secure? Yeah, like I sat up all night worrying about that.
|
rodeodance
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-25-06 12:12 PM
Response to Original message |
3. he let that little jewel lip a few weeks ago also. |
gratuitous
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-25-06 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
6. Yeah, it's been mentioned a few times |
|
I remember marching back in late 2002 and early 2003, and the local paper editorialized that the protesters were a well-meaning but rather naive bunch, specifically citing the signs that a lot of people carried that said "No Blood for Oil." This war was about disarming a dictator, after all, they said. Don't you listen to the president?
Now the idea that we're invading other countries to secure our own access to the world's oil is accepted and conventional wisdom, and nobody bats an eye when the administration freely admits that we're trading our military's blood for oil. But remember, war protesters are naive, starry-eyed idealists who don't know how the world works, even if they were right four years before everyone else. So just shut up about it, you libruls. You don't know what you're talking about!
|
patrice
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-25-06 12:13 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Doing exactly what OBL wants, thusly making Muslim extremism |
|
the most popular force in the Muslim world.
|
subterranean
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-25-06 12:42 PM
Response to Original message |
5. It's one of the talking points he blurts out from time to time |
|
Nothing new, really -- "if we leave, the terrorists will gain control of vast (VAST!!) oil fields to finance more attacks." It's just another tactic designed to scare Americans.
|
lwcon
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-25-06 12:50 PM
Response to Original message |
7. Remember the original name for "Operation Iraqi Freedom"? |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sun May 12th 2024, 09:10 PM
Response to Original message |