| Submit your comments on this article | |||
| Arabia | |||
| Saudi prince sez war in Iraq was for oil | |||
| 2004-05-25 | |||
The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq was a colonial war and there were some in the United States who saw it as a means of getting their hands on Iraqi oil, a senior Saudi ambassador was quoted as saying on Monday. Prince Turki al-Faisal, ambassador to Britain and Ireland, told the Irish Independent newspaper Washington's stated aims in going to war in Iraq masked a more cynical reality. "No matter how exalted the aims of the U.S. in that war, in the final analysis it was a colonial war very similar to the wars conducted by the ex-colonial powers when they went out to conquer the rest of the world ...," Prince Turki said. "What we have heard from American sources [is that] they were there to remove the weapons of mass destruction which Saddam Hussein was supposed to have acquired. What we read and hear from our commentators in America and sometimes congressional sources, if you remember going back a year ago, there was the issue of the oil reserves in Iraq and that in a year or two they would be producing so much oil in Iraq that, as it were, the war would pay for itself. [This] indicated that there were those in America who were thinking in those terms of acquiring the natural resources of Iraq for America." Prince Turki said U.S. pledges to bring freedom and democracy to Iraq remained "still just aims."
| |||
| Posted by:Dan Darling |
| #57 Bulldog undecided. |
| Posted by: Antiwar 2004-05-25 1:42:39 PM |
| #56 Nearly weed not actually. President? Saddam? Only joking. President Kennedy (not Vietnam of course,but nobodys perfect)But have to say really no such thing as greatest President as they all are only human. |
| Posted by: Antiwar 2004-05-25 1:37:23 PM |
| #55 Yes it was about oil.GWB greatest President HA HA HA (nearly weed myself there) |
| Posted by: Antiwar 2004-05-25 1:24:46 PM |
| #54 OK, "Prince" - if you insist on believing this, you're absolutely right. And you're next. |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2004-05-25 9:39:15 PM |
| #53 DBT, Jen is part of something big. She's part of America. The only nation in the world with the balls to take on the growing and ancient danger of the legacy of a seventh century madman. This is, quite simply, a struggle of reason and enlightenment and logic versus tyrrany going under the guise of "religion." I ask you, is there anything more evil than that? Their "holy men" teach that Allah likes it when you tear your enemies apart limb from limb. Can you truly think of anything more despicable? |
| Posted by: The Doctor 2004-05-25 6:44:32 PM |
| #52 DBT, none of what you say is true or can be backed up by facts, evidence or proof; it's all lies, slander and innuendo (and you know it), mixed in with ad hominems on President Bush. I AM part of something Big--there are way more Americans that feel as I do than Bush-haters like you (and many of our people have guns!). This article is about the Sods--they're the ones playing the oil card to hurt Bush and it's them who will hurt now that Iraq is free. Their days as the despot of OPEC are waning. And they'd never allow a Shiite government in Iraq--they hate Iran as it is, because the rest of the Arab world (led by SA) is Waahab Sunni. |
| Posted by: Jen 2004-05-25 5:26:00 PM |
| #51 Denny: Both Platt's and OPEC's websites have all the details about strategic production cutbacks that your fanatic mind won't let you and Jen-I-Want-to-be-part-of-something-big-even-as-an-apologist won't admit.---------- If this President is allowed to be right by fact of office, then why not bring back the English monarchy? George-the-3rd had the same direct line to the Holy Ghost, as the Texas crook. If you want to prostrate before the progeny of a liar and a thief, then become a Muslim.------- Scalia's Prez: "...The rise of a free and self-governing Iraq will deny terrorists a base of operation, discredit their narrow ideology, and give momentum to reformers across the region. This will be a decisive blow to terrorism at the heart of its power, and a victory for the security of America and the civilized world." Reality check: GWB allowed as many as 10,000 Iranian fanatics to make political pilgrimage to Iraq, while permitting al-Sadr's "Mahdi (Savior) Army" exclusive armed patrol privileges in much of Baghdad. With GWB's approval, last Summer al-Sadr travelled to Qom and Teheran, to take personal counsel from Ayatoilet Rafsanjani ("nuke Israel"). In GWB's mind, his legitimation of Iranian subversion and terror in Iraq, was an issue of respect for free exercise of religion.---------- American security cannot rest on accomodation of the global-genocidal aims of Wahabi and Khomenist clerics. And that is exactly what the Texas Crook is doing, at tremendous human and financial waste. History will not treat him well. Hmmm. Do I have to puppy train fanatics by rubbing their noses in GWB's stated acceptance of an Islamic State in Iraq? Afganistan? Pakistan? |
| Posted by: Dog Bites Trolls 2004-05-25 5:06:40 PM |
| #50 To answer the question about high gas prices thank the enviroturds. No new refineries built since 1976. Multiple boutique blends. No drilling in ANWR. The list goes on. |
| Posted by: Denny 2004-05-25 2:43:22 PM |
| #49 hey antiwar it looking like your find a buddy. |
| Posted by: muck4doo 2004-05-25 2:34:32 PM |
| #48 As the days of the end of zion draw near, the Jooooos run here and there. I can only imagine what it's gonna be when the zion will be occupied. Guess it's gonna be kinds Cooool!. |
| Posted by: Faisal the Goyem 2004-05-25 2:24:03 PM |
| #47 IMO, Antiwar is a fake -- s/he pretends to be a nice, concerned liberal, but s/he gets real nasty when support for islamofascists (including undermining Western society and values) is confronted too directly. So as not to waste bandwidth, you can read the Same Story, Different Day -- right here in a previous thread. |
| Posted by: cingold 2004-05-25 2:19:05 PM |
| #46 Millard Fillmore's not in the same league as Martin Van Buren. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2004-05-25 2:10:20 PM |
| #45 let "Gentle" "Antiwar" be - don't waste the bandwidth and keyboard effort |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-05-25 1:56:37 PM |
| #44 [Off-topic or abusive comments deleted] |
| Posted by: Antiwar TROLL 2004-05-25 1:42:39 PM |
| #43 nearly weed? is thaat like oregeno? |
| Posted by: muck4doo 2004-05-25 1:40:51 PM |
| #42 Antiwar - who was greater, Che Guevara or Margaret Thatcher? |
| Posted by: Bulldog 2004-05-25 1:39:56 PM |
| #41 Kennedy had his faults, too. He was as much of a playboy as Clinton was - but with much better taste (Marilyn Monroe!). He really could be attacked, just like you've attacked Bush. And the parallels between Vietnam and Iraq have been drawn before - perhaps you have drawn some of them. Just think about that. For my money, though, I'd have to say Millard Filmore was the greatest, just because he had such a great name. And because the Earth did not crash into the sun during his time as President. |
| Posted by: The Doctor 2004-05-25 1:39:54 PM |
| #40 [Off-topic or abusive comments deleted] |
| Posted by: Antiwar TROLL 2004-05-25 1:37:23 PM |
| #39 Anti wet her panty, Anti wet her panty |
| Posted by: remote man 2004-05-25 1:32:08 PM |
| #38 Not the tired old "all about the oil" line again. Gives me a headache every time I hear it. If it was about the oil, we'd have taken it by now and simply exterminated as much of the country as we could have. We have not. Ergo . . . wait, I forgot; logic is lost on these clowns. Antiwar, I'll bite. Who is the greatest President, then? |
| Posted by: The Doctor 2004-05-25 1:30:52 PM |
| #37 ima like to grab me trusty pipe and weed myself to. makin me feel mello. |
| Posted by: muck4doo 2004-05-25 1:29:53 PM |
| #36 [Off-topic or abusive comments deleted] |
| Posted by: Antiwar TROLL 2004-05-25 1:24:46 PM |
| #35 muRAT - if you put it into purely numbers turkey is way ahead - we killed about million vietamese..indians well there were barely a million on the continent..and for arabs.. unfortunely uncle sam takes a more humane approach to war these days and we are only in the tens of thousands..get your figures straigt if you are going to use that tackless line...... and remember the turks systimatically killed the armenians - in this sense you are closer to nazi's (and nazism is a political force that historically arabs gravitated too). and if this is about oil why am i paying $2.39 a gallon for gas! |
| Posted by: Dan 2004-05-25 12:00:36 PM |
| #34 It wasn't about oil but about cash. Cash in the hands of a tyrant like saddam is a bad thing, thats what the Kuwait war was about. Anyone disagree about that? Cash in the hands of wahhabi fruitcakes in SA is a bad thing. Cash in the hands of NK, not good. Cash in the hands of jihadies, very bad! |
| Posted by: Lucky 2004-05-25 11:49:04 AM |
| #33 "Whatever dudes, as long as Arabs stay morons they deserve to be treated like dirt by occupating soldiers enjoying impunity against crimes and human rights abuses in their own country." Uh the abu ghraib (sp) prison abuse scandal is going to earn people jail time. At least we agree they behave like morons. "History is repeating, the Nazi American is cleaning up the modern day Jew (Arabs)" IF that were true, why has it taken us so long? IF there were any truth in that, we would have taken their oil. |
| Posted by: flash91 2004-05-25 11:20:44 AM |
| #32 Murat - Kurdsucker |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-05-25 11:17:46 AM |
| #31 turk + camel = arab |
| Posted by: anon 2004-05-25 10:48:26 AM |
| #30 I think Murat's projecting here... probably a deeply repressed guilt over having ruled the arabs for centuries. Murat, what do you think of the arabs? Your people have quite a colonial, muslim-on-muslim history with them, doesn't it? Is present US imperialism really worse than past turkish one, or that Turkey's ambitions over turkish speaking central Asia? |
| Posted by: Anonymous4134 2004-05-25 10:29:37 AM |
| #29 The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq was a colonial war and there were some in the United States who saw it as a means of getting their hands on Iraqi oil, a senior Saudi ambassador was quoted as saying on Monday. Well it seems that the plan didn't work... |
| Posted by: Bomb-a-rama 2004-05-25 10:14:16 AM |
| #28 So how come I'm paying two bucks and change for a gallon of gas?????? |
| Posted by: growler 2004-05-25 10:12:20 AM |
| #27 Fine, I'll say it: It was all about oil. Absolutely, 100%. And once Iraq's oil production is back where it ought to be, perhaps we can tell the inbred princes of Sa'ud to blow it out their collective ass with absolute impunity. |
| Posted by: eLarson 2004-05-25 10:05:22 AM |
| #26 20 million you say? Guess we'll have to bomb a helluva lot more "weddings" to catch up to that record. And it was 1.5 million, moron. You don't even know your own history, so don't pretend to know ours, DUDE. |
| Posted by: tu3031 2004-05-25 9:27:04 AM |
| #25 Indians, Vietnamese, Arabs ...... |
| Posted by: Murat 2004-05-25 8:56:55 AM |
| #24 No buddy, at least 20 million, but even that you guys are surpassing in style. |
| Posted by: Murat 2004-05-25 8:55:39 AM |
| #23 How many Armenians was it, Murat? Two million, three million? I forget sometime. |
| Posted by: tu3031 2004-05-25 8:48:24 AM |
| #22 Whatever dudes, as long as Arabs stay morons they deserve to be treated like dirt by occupating soldiers enjoying impunity against crimes and human rights abuses in their own country. All that in the name of democracy, what a joke! History is repeating, the Nazi American is cleaning up the modern day Jew (Arabs) |
| Posted by: Murat 2004-05-25 8:37:23 AM |
| #21 Murat, Do you know how many expats vs. Saudis work for Aramco? Do you know who keeps this company operating? Take a guess? Come out with a figure and then we will talk. |
| Posted by: Anonymous4617 2004-05-25 8:07:55 AM |
| #20 And just how do you figure that,Mu-rat? What happen,Dude? You use to at least make an attempt at rational disscusion. Were you to close to those Turkish booms awhile back? Did you suffer some sort of brain damage? Have stopped taking your Riddlin? |
| Posted by: Raptor 2004-05-25 7:53:44 AM |
| #19 Does prins Moron realise that his own country was virtually already colonial occupied by US oil giants. Heck even morons begin to realise your plans dudes. |
| Posted by: Murat 2004-05-25 7:15:24 AM |
| #18 Precisely Jen - we ARE at war and need to see these policies through - I must admit to being a tad cynical about the Bush admin, but RB has helped me overcome that to some degree. Time to talk softly to the arabs whilst wielding a big stick. Now go get that ice-pack. |
| Posted by: Howard UK 2004-05-25 6:05:39 AM |
| #17 Sorry, Howard...maybe you have to be over here in America but I'm sick to death of these Lying Liars and the tired lies they've repeated ad nauseum about President Bush. It's just not true--he's one of the finest presidents we've ever had and we're at war. If he's not reelected, I fully expect a "President" John Ketchup to pull out our troops from everywhere and just have us stay home and wait for the next terror attack. |
| Posted by: Jen 2004-05-25 5:59:29 AM |
| #16 Cold shower for Jen please. Don't let them excite you so much, hun. |
| Posted by: Howard UK 2004-05-25 5:47:00 AM |
| #15 "The purpose of the war was: to spend $150,000,000,000 to make the Texas Crook appear Presidential." 150 trillion??? Congress didn't pass close to that for the war. And how much did it cost us for Bill Clinton to make the office look UN-presidential for 8 years, including kicking the can of history down the road so that we got 9/11 itself? "The goods: Iran's cultural integration with Shiite Iraq..., is poised to enter its political integration phase;" This is a lie and isn't even close to happening. If the Mahdi Army had succeeded--which they did not--that was supposed to happen, but it won't. Shiites and Sunnis are obliterating the Secular remnants of Iraq; Nope. Nor this either. American soldiers are not allowed to retalitate when koranimals set off Road Side Bombs; I've never seen this as our "rule of engagement." " al-Sistani has signalled use of the Shiite majority to force establishment of an Islamic State, after the one-time "freedom" elections. No?" NO. Definitely no--In fact, Sistani not only allowed the signing of the new Iraqi constitution to go through but he disuaded Shiites from following al-Sadr. Put up or shut up! Cowardly use of ad hominens isn't: put up. NO--YOU put up or shut up! You make Chicken Little assertions like this with no facts to back it up and have the nerve to assault us with your brain-dead Leftist "rhetoric?!" And will you really SHUT UP?! I cannot take seriously anyone with the name "DogBitesTrolls." |
| Posted by: Jen 2004-05-25 5:44:16 AM |
| #14 Flea-BittenTroll, And you say this because why EXACTLY? And I want detailed arguments backed up by facts! And if you were in the White House (or your boy Kerry, I presume?), what would you/he do instead? Because I think President Bush is doing a terrific job given the task in front of him on 9/11/01. |
| Posted by: Jen 2004-05-25 5:34:22 AM |
| #13 GWB should become a comedian. What a freaking joke!: "...The rise of a free and self-governing Iraq will deny terrorists a base of operation, discredit their narrow ideology, and give momentum to reformers across the region. This will be a decisive blow to terrorism at the heart of its power, and a victory for the security of America and the civilized world..." http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/05/20040524-10.html What a snake oil vender! Food for life-loser human trolls! |
| Posted by: Dog Bites Trolls 2004-05-25 3:22:05 AM |
| #12 Halfass Pete: Those two were very funny...and close to the mark. Best Wishes, |
| Posted by: Traveller 2004-05-25 3:20:35 AM |
| #11 The purpose of the war was: to spend $150,000,000,000 to make the Texas Crook appear Presidential. The goods: Iran's cultural integration with Shiite Iraq, is poised to enter its political integration phase; Shiites and Sunnis are obliterating the Secular remnants of Iraq; American soldiers are not allowed to retalitate when koranimals set off Road Side Bombs; al-Sistani has signalled use of the Shiite majority to force establishment of an Islamic State, after the one-time "freedom" elections. No? Put up or shut up! Cowardly use of ad hominens isn't: put up. |
| Posted by: Dog Bites Trolls 2004-05-25 3:15:02 AM |
| #10 The individual Iraqi, until he can actually declare that his government is truly representative of his wishes and aspirations must still consider himself occupied The individual Saudi who does not belong to the Saudi royal family, until he can actually declare that his government is truly representative of his wishes and aspirations must still consider himself occupied |
| Posted by: Mike Sylwester 2004-05-25 2:43:31 AM |
| #9 we should drill for oil in anwar using turki's head as a bit |
| Posted by: SON OF TOLUI 2004-05-25 2:31:06 AM |
| #8 If you give a fuckin' monkey a billion dollars, it's still a fuckin' monkey. |
| Posted by: Halfass Pete 2004-05-25 2:13:57 AM |
| #7 If we're stealing Iraqi oil, we're not stealing near enough of it. |
| Posted by: Halfass Pete 2004-05-25 2:07:24 AM |
| #6 Is the next step Arabia or Iran ...or both? |
| Posted by: Mark Espinola 2004-05-25 1:57:02 AM |
| #5 this prick was the head of saudi intelligence for years and their contact man withe taliban and protection payments to al queda--his whole fuckin' family is occupying arabia--the only country in the world named after a clan--saudis out of occupied hijaz--hashemites back to mecca and medina--eastern [oil] province to the local shia--saudi clan back to daryiah--eating dates, locusts and camel's milk--raiding for fun and profit--fuck turki and his whole corrupt family--remember during an interview--wolf blitzer practically sucked him off--allahu nakba!! |
| Posted by: SON OF TOLUI 2004-05-25 1:52:05 AM |
| #4 If the Iraqi war was ONLY over oil there are a number of other OPEC, as well as non-OPEC oil producers a war to 'steal' oil could have been waged. Saddam already had a war over Kuwaiti oil and the House of Saud was next but we bailed them out. For what? These attacks? If that Saudi does not clam up with his rubbish the sea of oil he and his Wahhabi cultists are floating on will go up in smoke, all caused by the very same terrorists Arabia created in the first place. |
| Posted by: Mark Espinola 2004-05-25 1:41:25 AM |
| #3 Turki is more closely aligned with Nayef than Abdullah, says the Jooos perpetrated 9/11, etc. He's one of the Wahhabi-supporting looneytoon "princes" of the House of Saud. I'm sure the moron Irish press, generally just to the left of Trotsky and unexceeded in their anti-Bushism, ate it up. Prolly blew him after the interview. |
| Posted by: .com 2004-05-25 12:41:28 AM |
| #2 These remarks just show that being rich doesn't preclude being stupid. If we'd wanted oil, Saudi would have been a lot less trouble to take. They weren't bribing the French. |
| Posted by: RWV 2004-05-25 12:31:26 AM |
| #1 Sounds like this guy reads alot of our (USA) mainstream dead tree press and is watching the ABCCNBSNBC Networks plus Al Jizz 24x7. |
| Posted by: Long Hair Republican 2004-05-25 12:29:06 AM |