NewsMine — war-on-terror — iraq — pretext — Viewing Item

Wolfowitz says war about oil Original Source Link: (May no longer be active)    http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12956,970334,00.html http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12956,970334,00.html http://www.khilafah.com/home/category.php?DocumentID=7345&TagID=2 Wolfowitz: Iraq war was about oil Guardian, UK - 20 hours ago uploaded 04 Jun 2003 Oil was the main reason for military action against Iraq, a leading White House hawk has claimed, confirming the worst fears of those opposed to the US-led war. The US Deputy Defense Secretary, Paul Wolfowitz - who has already undermined Tony Blair's position over weapons of mass destruction (WMD) by describing them as a "bureaucratic" excuse for war - has now gone further by claiming the real motive was that Iraq is "swimming" in oil. The latest comments were made by Mr Wolfowitz in an address to delegates at an Asian security summit in Singapore at the weekend, and reported today by German newspapers Der Tagesspiegel and Die Welt. Asked why a nuclear power such as North Korea was being treated differently from Iraq, where hardly any weapons of mass destruction had been found, the deputy defense minister said: "Let's look at it simply. The most important difference between North Korea and Iraq is that economically, we just had no choice in Iraq. The country swims on a sea of oil." Mr Wolfowitz went on to tell journalists at the conference that the US was set on a path of negotiation to help defuse tensions between North Korea and its neighbors - in contrast to the more belligerent attitude the Bush administration displayed in its dealings with Iraq. His latest comments follow his widely reported statement from an interview in Vanity Fair last month, in which he said that "for reasons that have a lot to do with the US government bureaucracy, we settled on the one issue that everyone could agree on: weapons of mass destruction." Prior to that, his boss, defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld, had already undermined the British government's position by saying Saddam Hussein may have destroyed his banned weapons before the war. Mr Wolfowitz's frank assessment of the importance of oil could not come at a worse time for the US and UK governments, which are both facing fierce criticism at home and abroad over allegations that they exaggerated the threat posed by Saddam Hussein in order to justify the war. Amid growing calls from all parties for a public inquiry, the foreign affairs select committee announced last night it would investigate claims that the UK government misled the country over its evidence of Iraq's WMD. The move is a major setback for Tony Blair, who had hoped to contain any inquiry within the intelligence and security committee, which meets in secret and reports to the prime minister. In the US, the failure to find solid proof of chemical, biological and nuclear arms in Iraq has raised similar concerns over Mr Bush's justification for the war and prompted calls for congressional investigations. Mr Wolfowitz is viewed as one of the most hawkish members of the Bush administration. The 57-year old expert in international relations was a strong advocate of military action against Afghanistan and Iraq. Following the September 11 terror attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon, Mr Wolfowitz pledged that the US would pursue terrorists and "end" states' harboring or sponsoring of militants. Prior to his appointment to the Bush cabinet in February 2001, Mr Wolfowitz was dean and professor of international relations at the Paul H Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), of the Johns Hopkins University. Source: Guardian / UK

alqaeda british david-kelly doubts false-intelligence inquiry investigation iraq-denies israel leak-osama-link wmd 2002 dia report questions intelligence for war { November 6 2005 } Administration manifactured and manipulated intelligence Broke missile limits { February 13 2003 } Bureau of intelligence and research got it wrong { July 19 2004 } Bush and blair plot pretext to attack iraq Bush warns on iraq { October 6 2002 } Chemical attack 45min Cheney passed intelligence from iraqi national congress Cheneys war by fraud exposed Could plant weapons Distortions of intelligence on iraq { August 1 2003 } Drone weapon { March 13 2003 } Drones target cities { February 24 2003 } Fabricating pretext war Found road German embassy siezed by anti hussein iraqis { August 21 2002 } German embassy siezed by iraqi dissidents { August 20 2002 } Iraq china chemical Iraq not violating fly zones { November 19 2002 } Iraq nukes soon { September 16 2002 } Iraq report claims no arms { September 17 2004 } Iraq report falls short { December 20 2002 } Iraqi speakers found { August 26 2002 } Nonexistent biolab trailers carried case for war { April 12 2006 } Nsa has evidence Oil contracts planned pre 911 Pilot behind enemy lines Powell testiomy based on flawed intelligence { February 5 2003 } Report criticizes administration assessments of iraq dangers Report says iraq bigger threat if defeated { July 21 2003 } Reporter apologizes for iraq coverage { March 29 2004 } Rumsfeld draws blank on blairs 45 minute iraq claim { February 11 2004 } Rumsfeld told saudi bandar sadam is toast Stovepipe seymour hersh { September 11 2001 } Tape deceiving inspectors { February 3 2003 } Tenet denied influence from osp { February 6 2004 } Tenet denies pressure to torque iraq intelligence Tenet says saddam wasnt threat Un finds empty warheads Us backed iraqis provided questionable info Whats he have White house embraced disputed intelligence { October 3 2004 } Wolfowitz says war about oil Files Listed: 43

Correction/submissions

CIA FOIA Archive

National Security Archives

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information, go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purpose of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.