Display:
It was about more than oil, although that is by far the most profitable portion of the Iraqi economy.  It was about creating a laissez-faire utopia, a kind of Chile but much more pure, where the principles of the radically free market would produce undreamed of prosperity at home and profit for the foreign owners.  The Republicans have been unable to do this even in the United States, but they could do it in an occupied country.  So what you have is a melding of Anglo free trade imperialism, so beloved by the Victorians, and a 20th century anti-communist ideology.  
by bellumregio on Wed Feb 21st, 2007 at 08:49:52 AM EST
I think oil is the primary objective, but there are ancillary geo-political considerations.  Almost a year and a half ago, I came across a commentary by Robert Higgs that remains (in my opinion) the most succinct analysis of the underlying Bush administration's plans for Iraq:

By effectively controlling the region, the U.S. government would attain several of its cherished ends. First, it would eliminate or greatly diminish the threats posed to Israel by countries such as Syria and Iran. Second, it would control much of the oil and gas extraction and transportation in a region believed to be richly endowed with untapped deposits of those prized fossil fuels. Third, it would butt up against the Russians and the Chinese, excluding them from hegemony or substantial influence in the lands of the Great Game. Fourth (but merely incidental, you should understand), important supporters of the Bush team would make tons of money: Halliburton, Bechtel, Chevron, Unocal, Shell, and the rest of the good old boys, not to mention the arms suppliers and the mercenaries.

I strongly urge you to read the entire article.

"Beware of the man who does not talk, and the dog that does not bark." Cheyenne

by maracatu on Thu Feb 22nd, 2007 at 07:43:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series