Oil for Blood! Oil for Blood!
Remember back in 2003 when everyone marched through DC and NYC chanting “No Blood for Oil”, only to be roundly ignored by just about everyone in power?
“No Blood for Oil” accurately expressed our resistance to the war: it was clear that one of the main reasons for going to Iraq was to steal secure the oil. This was illustrated clearly when, in the initial aftermath, our military stood by passively while museums, libraries, and just about the rest of the infrastructure was looted. In fact, about the only thing we protected was the oil ministry: it really doesn’t get more obvious than that, and you don’t have to be conspiracy-minded to grasp the concept.
Furthermore, a number of oil related promises were made.
From the International Herald tribune:
“When the White House’s economic adviser, Laurence Lindsey, said in September 2002 that the Iraq invasion could cost $100 billion to $200 billion (an estimate the White House quickly disavowed as too high), he indicated that one could expect an additional three to five million barrels a day of Iraqi oil production following the ouster of Saddam.”
Here are quite a few choice quotes from Representative Jan Schakowsky’s cached site:
State Department Official Alan Larson: “On the resource side, Iraq itself will rightly shoulder much of the responsibilities. Among the sources of revenue available are $1.7 billion in invested Iraqi assets, the found assets in Iraq…and unallocated oil-for-food money that will be deposited in the development fund.†[Source: Senate Foreign Relations Committee Hearing on Iraq Stabilization, 06/04/03]
Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage: “This is not Afghanistan…When we approach the question of Iraq, we realize here is a country which has a resource. And it’s obvious, it’s oil. And it can bring in and does bring in a certain amount of revenue each year…$10, $15, even $18 billion…this is not a broke country.†[Source: House Committee on Appropriations Hearing on a Supplemental War Regulation, 3/27/03]
Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz: “There’s a lot of money to pay for this that doesn’t have to be U.S. taxpayer money, and it starts with the assets of the Iraqi people…and on a rough recollection, the oil revenues of that country could bring between $50 and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years…We’re dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon.†[Source: House Committee on Appropriations Hearing on a Supplemental War Regulation, 3/27/03]
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld: “If you [Source: worry about just] the cost, the money, Iraq is a very different situation from Afghanistan…Iraq has oil. They have financial resources.†[Source: Fortune Magazine, Fall 2002]
And then there was Larry Lindsey’s claim that “The key issue is oil, and a regime change in Iraq would facilitate an increase in world oil,†which would drive down oil prices, giving the U.S. economy an added boost.”
Well, it’s been four years of war in Iraq, nearly 4,000 dead American soldiers, no end in sight, and gasoline has doubled to $3.15 per gallon. According to the Association of Convenience and Petroleum Retailing, gasoline was selling for between $1.53 to $1.73 a gallon in 2003.
Since “No Blood for Oil” was ignored in favor of “Blood for Oil”, I want to know, where’s my cheap gas? The American people were promised cheap gasoline if we’d trade our kids’ blood for it (and the Democrats just traded more kids’ blood for an increase in the minimum wage, so stop calling them “capitulators” and start calling them “collaborators”). The biggest thing that would keep Americans riding the war machine bandwagon would be to come through with that promise. We’ve already traded 4,000 troops: when do we get our cheap gas?
I asked that of Arlen Specter’s office this morning, and Bobby Casey’s office as well. “I’m not a ‘No Blood for Oil’ type,” I explained. “If we’re going to be shedding our people’s blood, the least you can do is get us our oil.”
“Blood For Oil! Blood For Oil!” I began to chant. “It was an even trade then: when are you going to keep your end of the bargain?”
The reactions I received were a nervous giggle from Casey’s staff, and shocked, and clearly disgusted, silence from Specter’s staff. I don’t know why my idea wasn’t embraced, or why anyone would think that my expectation that promises should be kept is remotely cynical.
After all, I was against this whole thing to begin with. It wasn’t my bright idea to start a war. It wasn’t my bright idea to occupy a sovereign nation or topple a government with no plans for the aftermath. That was my government’s idea, and they promised that if we just let them have their war, we’d all benefit.
Despite what the frothing-at-the-mouth right-wingers tell themselves, and despite what the troops have been told about “liberating people”, these guys and these guys and these guys and these guys and these guys really DID die for oil.
My question to our honest, forthright, and serious leaders: Did you let them die in vain? Where is our cheap gasoline? We’re already paying in blood, sweat, and tears: why do we have to pay out the nose as well for your bad judgement?
We’ve gave you your [our] precious blood. Give us our cheap gasoline. YOU PROMISED.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
