You've been visiting way to many whacked out liberal antiBush sites overflowing with conspiracist rhetoric and endless claims about what America is doing in the middle east.

It could take months to really get you up to speed on the issue, because the middle east is a complicated affair - but I'll try and synopsize:

After world war II the British and the US came into the middle east and took the primitives living their with no resources and brought in expensive technology to extract their oil. British Petroleum and ARAMCO (Arab American Company) were founded at this time. These nations were poor as church mice and had nothing to sell. The Saudis and others in the region would still be maurading bands of paupers today had no one ever invested in their oil and natural resources.

As soon as we invested large capital into the infrastructure, we had a national interest in defending it. At the same time the UN threw all the Jews from around the world who were being mistreated and disliked and granted their desire for a homeland - founding Israel.

In 1945, the US was the largest home for Jews in the world. Then Israel became the largest. Unfortunately this now created a problem. The Arabs loathed the Jews and King Saud was of the mindset that "If 1,000,000 arabs needed to be sacrificed to push the Jews into the sea it would be worth it to cleanse their land."

So here the US is - with a large Jewish population and a vested interest in ARAMCO, split between supporting the UN and Israel and protecting our Oil and capital interests.

Palestine has been the permanent group of sub-folks appointed to push the Jews into the sea.
They have brainwashed them into believing their martyrdom will be rewarded. King Saud and Saud tribe became King by pushing other bands of marauding arabs literally - to the sea - where they either fled or were slaughtered. His rhetoric was not conjecture but a plan of action to be employed. Palestine is king Saud's million sacrifices and that is why they have never been given a homeland - but are always fed enough money and resources to wage their war on Israel.

So now Iraq and "Saudi" Arabia are wealthy beyond their wildest dreams thanks to the wealth created by foreign investment into their resources. As usual, this wealth gets pocketed into the hands of a limited few. All the while the automobile industry becomes the largest industry and employs the most people in America. Oil becomes the single greatest and most valuable mined commodity for American prosperity. We deploy a fleet to be patrol the Persian gulf and sell planes and weapons to the newly rich nations. We provide Israel with discounted weapons too - because we know they will be assaulted by our other weapons sold to the Arabs if we do not. We effectively create a schizophrenic foreign policy that pleases neither the Arabs or the Israelis.

The Saudis are somewhat content enjoying custom Cadillacs and Rolls-Royce motorcars, Air-conditioning and gold handled sinks, etc. They refurbish the Muslim holy sites (The Dome of the Rock) (aka the Muslim meteorite appreciation center) and facilitate the printing of the Qur-an. I have a copy for services rendered it is inscribed:

By The Grace of Allah and His Help, The Printing of This Holy Qur-an: English Translation of "The Meanings and Commentary" is Completed at: The Custodian of The Two Holy Mosques King Fahd Complex for the Printing of the Holy Qur-an, Al Madinah Al Munawarah under the Auspices of the Ministry of Hajj and Endowments, The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

A more deluxe Qur-an can hardly be imagined, leather bound, gold leaf embossed and with onion leaf pages. As an example of the money funneled back into the state Religion it serves as an excellent example.

So the region becomes even more polarized between the haves and the have-nots. The have-nots are content thanks to the indoctrination of the Qur-an and strong religious doctrines. The women are veiled and illiterate and the men don't drink. (Keeping alcohol a sin is a key way to ward of rebellions)

All the while Israel is becoming the most militaristic and harshest of states. Compulsory military service for both women and men is employed. This the result of endless attacks against its peoples and an undiminishing threat.

Iraq is being ruled harshly by various folks a British friendly Prime Minister named Nuri as-Said until his demise by coup in 1958 and then replaced by a General named Abdul Karim Kassem in 1958 - himself executed by the Ba-athists in 1963. Until 1958 relations with Iraq were fairly pro-western.

Nuri as-Said (Image: Ency. Britannica)

Abdul Karim Kassem (Image: Time Inc.)

Then the Ba-athists camein Feb of 1963, a party founded in the Dawn of WWII in Syria. They were neo-Marxists and Pan Arab unionists, but a bloodthirsty lot and not very pro-western.
First came Abd al-Salem Arif only to replaced by Ahmad Hasan al-Bakr in 1968 after an air crash and some infighting. He was in charge and nationalized the Iraq Petroleum Company.

After the attack against Israel in 1973 in the Arab Israeli war, Iraq made it's first major anti-US move by boycotting selling oil to any nations that supported Israel. (Anyone who was alive then recalls the oil embargo and gas crisis in the US)

No, Iraq at this point was no friend of the west. Saudi Arabia still was cozier because we were there with ARAMCO and we offered security to the Saudi family from revolutionaries with a small military presence (a spoiled-rich psycho like Osama bin-Laden would later protest against these US forces as desecrators of the Holy soil)

In 1979 Saddam Hussein staged a coup and his bloody reign lasted 24 years. We used him to act as a thorn in Iran's side after the fall of the Shah and the hostage crisis in 1979 - but that was a lesser of evils scenario. All the pictures of Rumsfeld with Saddam occurred briefly as we tried to encourage Saddam in sustaining his war against the fundamentalist regime of the Ayatollah Khomeni. The weapons we provided and intelligence were minimal - but it started a chain reaction which made Saddam feel he was immune from US reprisal if he went after Kuwait.

The ties between Saudi Arabia were much stronger than with Iraq and the house of Saud feared for its existence if Saddam kept rolling his tanks further south. President GHWB did what was expected and saved the Saudis rear and quickly formed a UN coalition to oust Saddam. Britain is our natural sidekick - because they were the ones who first helped the Iraqis pump out their oil, develop their pipelines and had a long relationship with Iraq - at least until 1958.

After the relationship with Iraq went "south" big time in 1991 - Germany and France picked up their pace in strengthening ties that they had formed during the eighties. German contractors built Saddams bunkers, French & German munitions makers sold Saddam their "dual-purpose" goods and China helped create and install a fiber optic system for relaying military messages in Baghdad to Tikrit and other major cities.

France had HUGE multi-billion dollar contracts with Saddam and was naturally opposed to ousting Saddam when their bread and butter was at stake. They were doubly damned because Turkey cancelled a tank contract worth billions after the foolish French dissed them and called earlier conflicts of Turkey, acts of terror - and then failed to apologize!

So France was big-time hurting for bucks. Chirac was kissing Saddam's tushie for a big telecommunications job worth billions and then suddenly this insolent cowboy Bush gets it into his head to go after Saddam and his WMD! How DARE HE!

Yes the French and German opposition to war was based on their financial arrangements with Saddam and Iraq. He was their biggest customer who paid on time and in with big money. All the sanctions were managed to be circumvented by the UN "Oil for food" program - a program which has put BILLIONS of dollars into UN bank accounts to be managed. (How much of those BILLIONS has been legally embezzled by UN bigwigs is anybodies guess)

So now the UN, France & Germany are all opposed to going after $addam Hu$$ein! Any idiot who bothered to research what was going on could see why, but the socialists and neo-Marxists of the world have chosen Saddam as their "martyr of the moment" and think the Iraq war is a good one to club the US over the head. They know nothing - less than nothing of the middle east- but are robot anti-Americans, spoiled leftists who long for a socialist utopia which doesn't exist. They could hardly find Iraq on a map, much less explain how Iraq received its WMD and impetus to use them.

As for the Iraqi oil fields - they are not going to pay for our war or are the spoils of war. No matter what websites you have visited that say this is a war for oil - it's not. It was a pre-emptive attack on Saddam who was a constant threat to Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. (When Bush says Iraq was "a threat to its neghbors" - those are the two nations he is talking about)

Had Saddam not constantly shot at UN planes daily, and attempted to kill President GHWB - surely he could have had the sanctions lifted and gone back into business. However, his ego had been hurt in 1991 and his WMD program was going full steam since 1988. He still had 157 ton Anthrax 1 TON bombs buried and waiting to be used against Kuwait and Saudi Arabia as late as 1999. He couldn't be trusted. After 9/11 he was mentioned as a major suspect - because he had the motive and the money. No, the US did not plan 9/11 - that's insane and the rhetoric of exploitive Marxist parasites who pretend they are fed up Americans. We did not plan the bombing of our Barracks in Saudi Arabia, or the embassy in Lebanon, or the UN building bombing.

War for oil is a propaganda piece of flim-flam - fed to ignoramuses who eat it up and have no understanding of what's going on at all. It's a kindergarten mentality that needs to see a selfish robber type motive in the US action and label it with the worn out 19th century word "Imperialist" - the favored word of Marxists and socialists the world over describing anyone who earns their money through normal global business practices.

Yes, the US motive in going after Saddam was simple - take out a threat to the oil fields of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia and take out a potential source of terror money funding terror in the US. That's it. We don't benefit from the oil fields, we don't benefit anything to our economy at ALL. Financially the Iraq war is a losing proposition for the US. As a foreign policy move after 9/11 it's brilliant - because it takes the battle away from our shores and gives us a base of operations in the heart of the middle east, which if developed will allow us to resolve the Israel/Arab dilemma once and for all by providing a more western and fair distribution of wealth among the Arabs.

That's it. It's that simple. Its a daring gambit that paid off and promises to pay off in lasting peace. The Palestinian terror machine has received more money - from disgruntled fundamentalists and so their attacks continue. The fundamentalists are desperate to keep their Palestinian attack dog from becoming peaceful and prosperous.

That's the REAL NEWS - the REAL DEAL and the RAW TRUTH. Available here in a synopsized version. I have already spent FAR more time to explain this than I would wish - but it's worth it if I can wake some folks up to the TRUTH.

Don't lap up lies served by Marxists and socialists. Halliburton, Cheney, Rumsfeld - all are inconsequential to what's going on.

Halliburton has been working abroad making money on deals for decades.

Rumsfeld is a paid servant who is trying his best to buck the cozy Pentagon defense contractor establishment and save billions of taxpayer dollars - to those in the know the man's an unrecognized hero who's modernizing our military and trying to make pork projects obsolete. That's why he gets bad press - that's the secret no journalist writes about.

Cheney is a smart guy who doesn't give a damn about Iraq's oil and cares more about what will keep America from going through another 9/11 or worse an endless parade of 9/11s. He's not as ambitious as Gore was a VP and has no problems returning to the private sector. If it were about personal wealth and money - the man could have stayed richer just staying at Halliburton. No one mentions this on the left because their fantasy is much more comforting to them. They want a bad guy to condemn. To Marxists and socialists - successful business guys ARE bad guys. However, if you want a REAL bad guy - look at Kim iL Jong and his ruination of the North Korean people who eat their pets are starving and have no electricity. Look at the terrorists and the bloodthirsty fundamentalists to whom no act is too depraved or can't be washed away by some mis-reading of the Qur-an. Those are the real bad guys of the 21st century. Then there are the self-servers like Chirac and Schroeder - not evil but rather stupid and selfish.

You're looking in all the wrong places and being led around like a sheep to help empower others - only you don't know it.

SDAI-Tech1