U.S. Oil companies fail to secure a single contract in Iraq

http://www.time.com/time/world/artic...#ixzz1NEEvfdYA

I never bought into the war for oil theories, and this pretty much is the final stake in that viewpoint. I believe the invasion was a simple as Bush making a rash and wrong, yet good intentioned decision based on intelligence that he believed to be true at the time.

The insurgency on the other hand was due to a lack of military knowledge on W's part. Bush senior knew what would happen if he didn't just stop at the border. Sucks that W didn't think that far. Maybe we can stop letting politicians run wars now?

The strategic concerns in the middle east are wider than you're making them. The U.S.'s energy security is definitely one of them. I was never convinced that the war was started to make a U.S. oil company rich.

Do you think the Bush administration was searching for a reason to go to war?

Sidenote, here's an Army presentation on how the war was "won": http://abcnews.go.com/images/US/how_...n_anbar_v4.pdf

O U

Honestly, I still don't understand Bush's reasoning. And by that I'm not saying the reasons were sinister. The truth is probably a mix of the publically stated concerns and some undeclared strategic concerns.

I thought it was pretty widely known that the CIA gave him intelligence showing all signs that Sadaam's regime was building WMRAB, and Bush acted on that info. Later on, the CIA admitted the intelligence was faulty. Like you said I'm sure there are other strategic concerns that the general public does not know about.

Huh?

oh you...

Here are some facts. KBP and Halliburton were awarded contracts to provide infrastructure and support without a proper "hearing" or the requirements of at least 3 companies competing for the position. That's illegal. On top of that, Halliburton was allowed complete rights over any and all oil wells that were deemed in an "emergency state," so they pretty much had all control over the oil wells and pipelines that they wanted. frack our current militaristic state of affairs.

I am aware of that. And there were big public presentations about it. That may have even been the major factor. I'm just saying there are likely other concerns that I don't know about because it wasn't part of the public rhetoric. Energy security being one of them, even if it's just part of the background buzz. The president can't say, "WMD, also oil."