Bush's motivations in Iran.

[cyclezealot]

I strongly encourage Readers to go to Juan COle's web site, "Informed Comment" and read Sunday, Aug. 6 column on Iran and Bush's need for oil.
A high point. BUsh does not like Iran making long term oil contracts with China and India.
I note also, Iran was one of the countries to switch off the dollar to the euro. This is an important read. Skip to yesterday's column.
Link below.
http://www.juancole.com/
Two selected paragraphs.

And, why was Condi Rice's reaction to the capture of two Israeli soldiers and Israel's wholesale destruction of little Lebanon that these were the "birth pangs" of the "New Middle East"? How did she know so early on that this war would be so wideranging? And, how could a little border dispute in the Levant signal such an elephantine baby's advent? Isn't it because she had, like Tony Blair, been briefed about the likelihood of a war by the Israelis, or maybe collaborated with them in the plans, and also conceived of it in much larger strategic terms?

I've had a message from a European reader that leads me to consider a Peak Oil Theory of the US-Israeli war on Lebanon (and by proxy on Iran). I say, "consider" the "theory" because this is a thought experiment. I put it on the table to see if it can be knocked down, the way you would preliminary hypotheses in a science experiment

[Erika]

1. All done in the name of oil and greed

You have nailed the chickenhawk W and his oil people perfectly. They serve big oil, not us. That's their lives.

[bananarepublican]

2. "doo-doo" economics underpins the chicken-hawk fantasia!

At least we can take comfort from the fact that in many millions of years from now, the chicken-hawks of the future can acces the hydro-carbons of their long gone loved ones...

Even I don't precisely know what the above means! What I am sure of, however, is that I know a hell of a lot more than any combination of neocon-ass-holes!