Abizaid: Mideast wars may last 50 years ("I'm not saying this is a war for oil")

[Barrett808]

Source: Associated Press

PITTSBURGH - It might take as long as half a century before U.S. troops can leave the volatile Middle East, according to retired Army Gen. John Abizaid.

"Over time, we will have to shift the burden of the military fight from our forces directly to regional forces, and we will have to play an indirect role, but we shouldn't assume for even a minute that in the next 25 to 50 years the American military might be able to come home, relax and take it easy, because the strategic situation in the region doesn't seem to show that as being possible," Abizaid said Wednesday at Carnegie Mellon University.

Abizaid, the former commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East, stepped down in March as the longest-serving commander of U.S. Central Command. He retired from the Army in May and now is at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University.

The rise of Sunni extremism, burgeoning Shiite extremism, the Arab-Israeli conflict and the world economy's dependency on Mideast oil will keep Americans in the Middle East for a long time, he said.

"I'm not saying this is a war for oil, but I am saying that oil fuels an awful lot of geopolitical moves that political powers may have there," Abizaid said. "And it is absolutely essential that we in the United States of America figure out how, in the long run, to lessen our dependency on foreign energy."

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071101/ap_on_re_us/abizaid_middle_east

[saigon68]

1. Nice

</sarcasm>

[Turbineguy]

2. It would be ironic

if we burned up all the oil fighting for oil that we were simply buying at 1/4 of the price it is now. Oh, wait, it's not about oil.

[eagler]

3. The war will not continue one more day if we are not there to fight it

[maxsolomon]

4. why can't you say it? it is fucking obvious, you toady.

the

war

is

for

oil

[eagler]

5. As long as Americans allow themselves to be convinced

the war needs to continue - it will continue. The Dems just keep on paying for it.

[thunder35]

no it's over oil

[thunder35]

6. no it's over oil

[thunder35]

7. no it's over oil

[villager]

8. the empire will fall apart long before that, due to ecological collapse....

..overtaking any other ambitions...

[acmavm]

9. Golly general, if we develop and alternative energy source

we'll just be fine and dandy and the Middle East can go their own way. (Which will probably still be a problem for us considering how many we've murdered.)

[AdHocSolver]

10. Correction: It is not about oil, it is about profit.

We could have bought all the oil we wanted from Iraq. They would sell it to us. But our oil corporations would not be able to make the unseemly profits that they have been making.

The purpose of the Iraq war was to gain control of the oil so as to control the world oil supply. Then they could REDUCE the amount of oil on the market thus driving up the price. There was never any desire to rule Iraq. Just gain enough control over that country to be able to control the oil spigot. The civil war in Iraq could go on for decades. The purpose of keeping the U.S. troops there is not to prevent a blood bath. It is to keep control of the oil fields. The Iraqis can kill each other off, and it won't hurt oil company profits one bit.

The push for war with Iran has the same motivation. There is no need to win a war with Iran. Just take over and hold on to their oil fields. Even as we write, the price of gasoline has gone up this past week about 20 cents a gallon. The saber rattling over Iran has given OPEC an excuse to raise oil prices.

(snip)....
"The rise of Sunni extremism, burgeoning Shiite extremism, the Arab-Israeli conflict and the world economy's dependency on Mideast oil will keep Americans in the Middle East for a long time, he said."
....

He says this like these problems came about independently of U.S. actions, when in reality they were caused by U.S. policy, and, in fact, were the goals of the Bush/Cheney administration from the beginning. Besides limiting Iraqi oil production, the Iraq war, by design, has provided highly profitable no-bid contracts for Halliburton, et al, allowed them to loot the U.S. treasury, and has whipped up sectarian hostility in the Middle East as part of a divide-and-conquer strategy.

(snip)....
"And it is absolutely essential that we in the United States of America figure out how, in the long run, to lessen our dependency on foreign energy."
....

That this is there goal is a bald-faced lie. Their purpose is to keep the U.S. dependent on foreign oil, so long as the U.S. oil companies control that oil, because it is very profitable for them. The way to remove our dependence on oil is to increase vehicle gasoline mileage, push rapid development and implementation of wind and solar power, and spend the money that was already thrown away on the Iraq war on building mass transit systems. The technology to accomplish conservation of oil is here today, and has been available for at least a decade. There is more profit in war, so that is what they did.

[4dsc]

11. Wind and solar ??

Sorry but no amount of wind and solar is going to replace oil anytime within your lifetime and it they have nothing to do with the coming oil crisis..

[Javaman]

12. In 50 years, they will be throwing rocks at each other, because

the oil needed to manufacture weapons will be long gone.

[FreeStateDemocrat]

13. What if the country had followed President Carter's energy independence plan 30 years ago....

[Supersedeas]

14. fuel for the geopolitical power players -- like the Boooshes.

[bdamomma]

15. kick