O'Neill Book - Rummy's Team - mapped the Iraq Oil fields days into term

[cthrumatrix]

Page 96 (This as after the first NSC Meeting in January 10 days into Office)

"Documents were beign prepared by the Defense Intelligence Agency, Rumsfeld Intelligence arm, maping Iraq's oil fields and exploration areas and listing companies that might be interested inleveraging the precious asset."

more

"The desire to disuade countries from engaging in "asymetrical challenges" to the United States -- as Rumsfeld said in his January articulation of the demonstrative value of a premptive attack -- matched with plans for how the world's second largest oil reserve might be divided among the worlds contractors made for an irresitable combination, O'Neill later said."

Comment
-------
O'Neill talks of how ideas came from outside into these meetings and Rummy's memo of "outside powers" engaging in trade could get weapons and therefore we have to "engage".

How he connects "stopping groups who could harm the US" with splitting Iraq's oil is beyond me. This book just floors you with "leaps" in how things were "discussed or should I say NOT Discussed"

[paulthompson]

1. Incident?

Hey cthrumatrix,
Could you quote what you said in another thread, that Rumsfeld was looking for a pretext to go to war, some kind of incident? That sounds really interesting.

[cthrumatrix]

2. sure...this on page 96 (they were looking for the "how")

"Rumsfeld, O'Neill recallled was focused onhow an incident might cause escalted tensions--like the shooting down of an American plane in the regular engagements between US fighter and Iraqi antiaircraft batteries -- and what the US responses to such an oocurence might be."

Comment
This was very early on in shrubs term at the NSC meeting. I still think the most odd part is Rummy not only concerned about "weapons trade" falling into the wrong hands (which is good)...but the leap to Iraq and the Oil Maps he brought out so early --- to me --- that's a non-sequitor...where's the connection?

[paulthompson]

3. Thanks

I was thinking it would be more of him pining for an incident, but the wording you quote doesn't really seem that way. The wording is so vague.

I was hoping this would be something to nail him on.

[bryant69]

4. Here's the Pisser

Assuming we had to invade Iraq (which point I don't agree), and assuming the noblest of motives towards the Iraqi people (a point with which I also don't agree), we'd still have to protect the oilfields. No, not so the money could flow into American companies. But so they could bring money into Iraq and to the Iraqi people.

I'm sure Iraq has some other industry, but their main export is going to be oil. And if you want whatever sort of government arises out of the ashes of Saddam's regime to last, well, it will need a certain amount of economic stability.

The pisser is that of course Rumsfeld, Cheney and President Bush have proven themselves largely untrustworthy. So it's very easy, even natural, to ascribe to them the more ignoble reasons for protecting these oil fields (namely that they wanted to protect American investments).

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[htuttle]

5. "Protect the oilfields?"

Is that really what you got from that?

It reads to me that they were talking about 'dividing the oil fields up between companies', which is certainly a lot harder to spin 'noble' motives around.

[bryant69]

7. You're right

My brain must have skipped a gear. I think what I said was correct, just didn't apply to this particular conversation.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[terryg11]

6. why do some find this so hard to believe?

During the 2000 election me and a friend of mine (who is a republican) were talking about this. Both he and I agreed that Bush would have us back in Iraq before he left office. My friend wasn't real happy to have Bush as his candidate but never the less stuck by him. My point is that I'm sure we weren't the only two who had an idea what Bush was about before he even took office, so why do so many refuse to see tht the Iraq thing was most likely set in stone before last year?

Truly, this president is so damn transparent. You can see where he's coming from on every damn issue and it's usually for the wrong reasons!!!

[cthrumatrix]

8. kick for pm crowd