Bob,
I also dont trust government(s) much, I believe most are self serving and self perpuating. I heard the stuff about the Iraq war being a war for oil all throughout the last year during the election process as it was one of the antiwar battle cries of the Democrats. I guess I need help understanding that concept. If it is a war for oil, then why doesn't the US just get rid of any and all Iraqies that get in the way, take over the oilfields and start shipping it all to the USA? If the Bush people are such oil mongers, why did we not take over the Iraq oil fields when Bush Sr was in power during the first iraq war? If it is a war to preserve a supply of oil to the USA for the forseable future, (and paying Iraq for the oil as we do any other country which seems to be what the plan is) while getting rid of the terrorists along the way, what is wrong with that? The USA (as does the world) needs oil, yet we dont just steal it from anybody. We are being restricted and fought at every turn to drill for more in areas we own (coastal regions and Alaska) yet I dont see the folks that protest drilling the loudest quit driving or flying or heating their homes or not using anything that requires petrolium (plastics, cosmetics, food supply, to name only a few amoung thousands of products). They whine alot but sure dont provide much of an example. Ie, the Kennedy's are fighting putting a big wind farm off the coast of Mass cause it would be in their back yard spoiling thier ocean view yet they are some of the whiners regarding "war for oil". (personally I think a bunch of big windmills is a thing of beauty art and grace). Would it be acceptable if our gov just stepped back and urged the total non use of any petrolium, passed laws forbidding any new "environmental impact" due to drilling and took an adversarial position against the oil companies?. What kind of chaos would happen in this country if in the next year or two the oil supply was cut in half, even the protesters might have a change of heart watching their kids freeze to death, or not being able to drive anywhere or not get anything to eat due to the non transportation and production (tractors, trucks and trains use petrol) of the food supply. Dont get me wrong, Im all for conservation and the development of energy alternatives, (and the gov could push for alternatives much more than they are) but I just dont see what is wrong with preserving a much needed continued supply of oil for the next 50 years or so. So please help me understand what is meant by "Iraq is a war for oil."
Regards
John