DrDNA Posted September 16, 2007 Share Posted September 16, 2007 "AMERICA’s elder statesman of finance, Alan Greenspan, has shaken the White House by declaring that the prime motive for the war in Iraq was oil. In his long-awaited memoir, to be published tomorrow, Greenspan, a Republican whose 18-year tenure as head of the US Federal Reserve was widely admired, will also deliver a stinging critique of President George W Bush’s economic policies. However, it is his view on the motive for the 2003 Iraq invasion that is likely to provoke the most controversy. “I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil,” he says. Greenspan, 81, is understood to believe that Saddam Hussein posed a threat to the security of oil supplies in the Middle East.........." http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article2461214.ece I never would have believed that Greenspan would admit that. He must have had a major life changing event......on the scale of religous conversion, a near death experience, or maybe a horse kicked him in the head..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted September 16, 2007 Share Posted September 16, 2007 What a revelation! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted September 16, 2007 Share Posted September 16, 2007 Protecting resource supply has been one of the most important factors in world affairs since the Suez crisis. What Greenspan is really saying is that there's a fairly subtle policy distinction that takes place at an intellectual level that the current US administration (and previous British one) didn't feel the average Joe was capable of parsing. He's got a point there (Greenspan does), but the unfortunate side effect of this is the way it will be manipulated by conspiracy theory nutjobs and anti-corporation wackos the world 'round. (sigh) I've been looking forward to this book for some time now, btw, and plan to read it. I've read a couple of bios on the guy and some of his essays from his Objectivist days as well. Interesting fellow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotcommodity Posted September 16, 2007 Share Posted September 16, 2007 Honesty can be so refreshing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted September 16, 2007 Share Posted September 16, 2007 On a tangentially related manner Alan Greenspan just repudiated himself for his own lack of foresight regarding the subprime lending crisis: http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article2459578.ece Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphus Posted September 16, 2007 Share Posted September 16, 2007 Of course, coming from an Ayn Rand disciple, starting a war to get your hands on a lot of oil is not something to be critical of, nor is lying about it. His criticism is directed at the public. "I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient." Not that it was done, and not that those in power failed to do what was politically inconvenient, but that it was inconvenient, i.e., that people wouldn't accept such a thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted September 16, 2007 Share Posted September 16, 2007 Expressing regret for a failure to properly regulate the market is decidedly non-Randian, however Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphus Posted September 17, 2007 Share Posted September 17, 2007 Expressing regret for a failure to properly regulate the market is decidedly non-Randian, however True! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted September 17, 2007 Share Posted September 17, 2007 So was working for the fed. One of the things I'm hoping for is a little bit more direct openness about his change of heart in that area over the years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blade Posted September 17, 2007 Share Posted September 17, 2007 War is fore the war profiteers http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid=-6621486727392146155&q=war+profiteers&total=431&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDNA Posted September 17, 2007 Author Share Posted September 17, 2007 The wheels continue to fall off the bus. I think that this a very very sad situation. Worse than I ever could have imagined. What next? A tell all book by Rove, Condi, Rumi,....? Is a late admission better than no admission at all?. Should he have just kept his mouth shut at this point? He certainly doesn't need the money (from the book revenues), but it sure looks like sales were the motivation. Perhaps I'm just naive...... If the situation in Nigeria degrades, as the worlds 7th largest oil producer ( documented as that, they very well could produce more off the books), can we expect the same thing to happen there? Crazy times these are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted September 17, 2007 Share Posted September 17, 2007 War is fore the war profiteers Blade, why don't you speak your mind thoroughly and then hang around and defend your position? Much more interesting that way. I think you'll find that nobody here is really interested in hit-and-run posts. Besides, one-liners are for ideologues. Or as George Lucas put it, "Only the Sith speak in absolutes." (Isn't it amusingly ironic that a Jedi said that? You know, speaking in absolutes....) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blade Posted September 17, 2007 Share Posted September 17, 2007 Blade, why don't you speak your mind thoroughly and then hang around and defend your position? Much more interesting that way. I think you'll find that nobody here is really interested in hit-and-run posts. Besides, one-liners are for ideologues. Or as George Lucas put it, "Only the Sith speak in absolutes." (Isn't it amusingly ironic that a Jedi said that? You know, speaking in absolutes....) well fore one thing. the forums here are not active enough to hang around and f5 all the time. and how am i supposed to put that long documentary in words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saryctos Posted September 18, 2007 Share Posted September 18, 2007 well fore one thing. the forums here are not active enough to hang around and f5 all the time. and how am i supposed to put that long documentary in words. You could just...not post @ all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted September 18, 2007 Share Posted September 18, 2007 You could just...not post @ all I'm not a betting man, but I'd wager a fairly large sum of money that this was not what Pangloss meant with his comment. Quite the opposite, actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted September 18, 2007 Share Posted September 18, 2007 Now that wasn't very nice, Saryctos! 50 lashings with a wet noodle! But seriously, Blade, we'd love to hear your thoughts on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Severian Posted September 18, 2007 Share Posted September 18, 2007 Aren't there any safeguards in place to prevent a conflict of interest in the US Executive branch of government? I would have thought having a President and Vice President sitting on boards of large oil companies would be regarded as a conflict of interest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParanoiA Posted September 18, 2007 Share Posted September 18, 2007 Aren't there any safeguards in place to prevent a conflict of interest in the US Executive branch of government? I would have thought having a President and Vice President sitting on boards of large oil companies would be regarded as a conflict of interest. You'd think... Almost as disturbing as the Federal Reserve. We have unelected people dictating economic policy. Some would also argue that their position on oil isn't a conflict of interest since all of us have an interest in oil - maintaining our standard of living. I don't agree with that, but I can see it coming... Maybe we should consider separation of business and state rather than worry so much about church and state... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pangloss Posted September 18, 2007 Share Posted September 18, 2007 Aren't there any safeguards in place to prevent a conflict of interest in the US Executive branch of government? I would have thought having a President and Vice President sitting on boards of large oil companies would be regarded as a conflict of interest. The president and vice president do not sit on any boards of any public corporations. Nor do they have any private interests -- they even divest themselves of investments in publically-held companies. I believe there are regulations or laws about that sort of thing. I believe these rules affect ALL government officials. What you're really asking is why someone is allowed to be president or vice president when they've formerly held a position on the board of a large corporation. Obvious responses to that position include "isn't that something for the voters to decide" and "what, you can't be a board member of a large corporation and then go on to become a politician? why not?". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bascule Posted September 18, 2007 Share Posted September 18, 2007 The president and vice president are exempt from conflict of interest laws for whatever retarded reason. Cheney still has unexercised Halliburton stock options which are skyrocketing in value, however Cheney claims that they're earmarked for various charities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted September 19, 2007 Share Posted September 19, 2007 The president and vice president are exempt from conflict of interest laws for whatever retarded reason. Cheney still has unexercised Halliburton stock options which are skyrocketing in value, however Cheney claims that they're earmarked for various charities. Perhaps it's for the "Richard Cheney Medical Bill" Foundation. As to the OP - I guess a war about oil is better than a war about nothing at all. In other words, it's an improvement over 'nam. (maybe?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted September 19, 2007 Share Posted September 19, 2007 As to the OP - I guess a war about oil is better than a war about nothing at all. In other words, it's an improvement over 'nam. (maybe?) Yes, but this is a bit like saying that pouring lemon juice on to an open wound is better than pouring hydrochloric acid on to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDNA Posted September 19, 2007 Author Share Posted September 19, 2007 The president and vice president are exempt from conflict of interest laws for whatever retarded reason. Cheney still has unexercised Halliburton stock options which are skyrocketing in value, however Cheney claims that they're earmarked for various charities. Wow. I didn't know that. Does anyone know the supposed logic behind this exemption? That seems to be soooooo wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hotcommodity Posted September 19, 2007 Share Posted September 19, 2007 As to the OP - I guess a war about oil is better than a war about nothing at all. In other words, it's an improvement over 'nam. (maybe?) I think most, if not all, of the troops who have been injured or died in the Iraqi War would disagree with that statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecoli Posted September 19, 2007 Share Posted September 19, 2007 I think most, if not all, of the troops who have been injured or died in the Iraqi War would disagree with that statement. It depends on how much they like oil... Also, don't forget that some of them probably still think this is completely about homeland security and that Sadaam was responsible for 9/11. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now