Gee, I'm so surprised!

[yendi]

As first linked by trillian42, ex-Bush boytoy Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill (not to be confused with the former Yankee and Red of the same name) admits that the administration had been planning on invading Iraq from the get-go.

What a shock. The invasion had nothing to do with 9/11 (no matter how many times Dick "I really really really have no financial interest in Haliburton, I just suck their executives' cocks for fun" Cheney says that Saddam was behind the events of that day). It had nothing to do with wanting to get rid of a bad man (there were, and still are, so many folks who are just as bad, if not worse). It had nothing to do with bringing democracy to a people who have been deprived of it (hello, China calling). It had to do with two things: Bush wanting revenge for his Daddy's election loss, and Bush, Cheney, et al wanting to help their industry buddies. Yeah, it did result in getting rid of a bad man, but that was, at best, a pleasant side-effect (and until at least ten years from now, we won't know if Iraq has really become a better place). Every fucking life lost in this war, whether American GI or Iraqi citizen (we'll give the anti-benefit of the doubt and assume that all Iraqi soldiers were loyal to Saddam and therefore supported him completely), was lost for these causes. Anyone who tries to tell you otherwise is either someone with something to lose (read: Cheney or one of his butt-buddies), or someone who's sticking their head in a five-gallon hole filled with ten gallons of shit to drown out the truth.

But hey, look, we're colonizing Mars! Nothing to see here. Move along.

Comments

[dwivian]

Everyone has cheap fuel. Not everyone fails to tax it as much as the 'merkins do. I'm not so sure I approve of that, but that's because I see the problem of the impending failure of the oil system, and the necessary starvation of billions of people that will result.

So, it makes sense that the US government (no matter who is in power) would want to protect oil interests.

[silme.livejournal.com]

The Americans barely tax it. I used to pay the equivalent of $4.50 a gallon for fuel (I'm an American ex-pat in the UK). Since the dollar has taken such a dive, I pay more in dollars now. Hong Kong has 100% tax. Of course, they also have fantastic public transport. (I've ridden on it. And my husband has worked on it as well. :)

The idea over here is to tax it so much it will get people out of their cars. Not working. Now, of course, they're looking at other ways to get money out of people regarding driving. Some are very interesting...

That said, the American (merkins are something very different :) government could be spending its resources investigating alternative sources of energy, but then that wouldn't profit certain folks in the administration. :( I remember -- during either the Reagan administration or the first Bush one -- I honestly can't remember which now -- when Congress was trying to increase the average mpg cars sold in the US must obtain by 2000. It was nixed by the prez. That average seems so low... (I was driving a Honda Civic then and getting 50 mpg on the highway minimum. My husband used to own a diesel Vauxhall (Chevy) estate (wagon); it achieved over 50 mpg, but you don't see cars like that in the US. I now drive a little VW Lupo -- great mileage, but it's not even sold in the US. I read something about VW didn't think they could market a car in US that achieved over 60 mpg on the highway...

Or having better and more reliable public transportation outside of the Northeast Corridor. Details. :)