Home Mobile Archives Reader Blogs Register Login

Monday, September 17, 2007

Alan Greenspan Clarifies His Comments On War For Oil

But something tells me this clarification isn’t going to get near the attention the original misleading reports about his “war for oil” comments got.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Clarifying a controversial comment in his new memoir, former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said he told the White House before the Iraq war that removing Saddam Hussein was “essential” to secure world oil supplies, according to an interview published on Monday.

Greenspan, who wrote in his memoir that “the Iraq War is largely about oil,” said in a Washington Post interview that while securing global oil supplies was “not the administration’s motive,” he had presented the White House before the 2003 invasion with the case for why removing the then-Iraqi leader was important for the global economy.

“I was not saying that that’s the administration’s motive,” Greenspan said in the interview conducted on Saturday. “I’m just saying that if somebody asked me, ‘Are we fortunate in taking out Saddam?’ I would say it was essential.”

So, in summary, “war for oil” was Greenspan’s justification, not the Bush administration’s. 

I won’t hold my breath waiting for a correction/retraction from the reporters who broke this story by mischaracterizing Greenspan’s statements.

But as I mentioned when this story first broke, would it matter if part of the justification for war in the middle east was securing our oil supply?  We’re in the middle east to stabilize the region.  We want to stabilize the region because a) Islamic terrorism has its roots there and b) we’re dependent on the oil.  We are stabilizing the region by opposing tyrannical and fundamentalist groups that would oppress the people and promote instability.

What’s so wrong with that?

Update: Apparently the folks at AFP didn’t get the memo about Greenspan’s clarification this morning.  Either that or they don’t care.

image

Comments

Al G can tell us what
was was motive?

securing global oil supplies was “not the administration’s motive

Not global oil supplies,
perhaps M.E. oil supplies?

Al G continues with his
Delphic Oracle pronouncements,
confounding the multitudes.

WOOF on September 17, 2007 at 09:41 am

I have waited till I could read more of what he actually said, only a few excerpts so far, and all not saying what has been in to media for 2 days. Typical.


Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

2Hotel9 on September 17, 2007 at 12:01 pm
Avatar for Aaron

Greenspan made several shocking statements in his new book and his interviews. He also says that interest rates will be over 10% and 10 year bonds over 8% in the next several years. I wrote about this earlier today.

http://www.growyourfunds.com/2007/09/alan_greenspans_new_book_arriv.html

Aaron on September 17, 2007 at 03:54 pm

Actually, aaron, you want to spam here you should know your target audience. Greenspan has so far said nothing out of line with his publicly stated positions of the last 10-15 years. Tilt. Reset. Try again.


Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

2Hotel9 on September 17, 2007 at 04:16 pm
Proof
Proof
12882 comments
Send a private message

Did you say Aaron or errin’?



Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.
Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Proof on September 17, 2007 at 04:26 pm

One more memo from “the Maestro” that won’t get nearly the attention it should in the mainstream press:

“The Clinton administration was a pretty centrist party. … But they’re not governing again. The next administration may have the Clinton administration name but the Democratic party … has moved … very significantly in the wrong direction.”

- Former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan in a WSJ interview (subscription required) as quoted by Larry Kudlow


“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Bat One on September 18, 2007 at 05:45 am

Perhaps when you consider the CONSERVATIVE congress we had at the time you could say the government was Centrist.

But Clinton was no Centrist.


What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.


The Whistler's signature
The Whistler on September 18, 2007 at 05:52 am

I think it is entirely fair to to suggest that Bill Clinton was the ultimate political opportunist and would have promoted himself as a staunch vegetarian Martian had it meant public approval and votes.

Hillary, on the other hand, is a dogmatic collectivist whose entire presidential campaign is predicated on the idea that the more rabidly vocal and mindless ill-behaved the far left fringe appears in public, the more moderate and centrist she appears by comparison.  He wanted everyone to like him… she wants everyone to obey.


“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Bat One on September 18, 2007 at 07:12 am
Avatar for Lestat

Greenspan also thought Bill was a fellow information hound who had the long term economic health of the country in mind when he made his policies while Bush is motivated by politics.

Lestat on September 18, 2007 at 07:21 am

Greenspan also thought Bill was a fellow information hound who had the long term economic health of the country in mind when he made his policies while Bush is motivated by politics.

That’s the most ignorant comment of the day.  Bill Clinton who set his core principles by focus groups wasn’t motivated by politics.  Who by his inaction allowed the Enron scandal to take place.


What’s going to happen to US industry when the global warming extremists like John McCain double the price of electricity?  I would think all these factories will close and set up in countries where they aren’t scared of technology.


The Whistler's signature
The Whistler on September 18, 2007 at 07:25 am

Greenspan also thought Bill was a fellow information hound who had the long term economic health of the country in mind when he made his policies while Bush is motivated by politics.

Lestat,

And your source for this “conclusion” is what, exactly?  There is no such intimation in Greenspan’s book that I saw, but if you think differently, certainly a quotation and page number shouldn’t be too awfully difficult.

Likewise, if your source is an interview given by the former Fed chairman, it should be no trouble for you to post a quotation and the appropriate URL, now should it?


“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Bat One on September 18, 2007 at 07:53 am

Greenspan also thought Bill was a fellow information hound who had the long term economic health of the country in mind when he made his policies while Bush is motivated by politics.

Lestat, you have it backwards; Clinton was motivated by nothing other than politics, while President Bush has the long term economic health of this country in mind with his reducing of tax rates for everyone.


"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

robert108 on September 18, 2007 at 07:59 am
Avatar for Ed Elfrink

Alan Greenspan - “The Age of Turbulence”

Chapter 24, “The Long-Term Energy Squeeze”, Page 463, Final paragraph, first sentence, “I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows:  the Iraq war is largely about oil.”

Ed Elfrink on September 25, 2007 at 06:08 pm

Too bad you can not read the whole book. How sad.


Una Salus Victus Nullam Sperare Salutem

2Hotel9 on September 25, 2007 at 06:17 pm
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses.

    

By submitting your comment you agree to our terms of service.