Kunicich and the reason for the war in Iraq.

[Eric J in MN]

Before the war, I saw an interview with Kucinich in which he said it was for oil.

But when Kucinich was asked tonight why Bush lied about wmd, Kucinich said "that is a question he will have to ask himself during his retirement."

Why did Kucinich say it was for oil before but not tonight?

[MurikanDemocrat]

1. Because it was a different question

The two answers are not inconsistent

[revcarol]

2. Good zinger, DK!!

Right on!!

[Egnever]

3. Wasnt it sharpton who said that?

seems to me it was sharpton with the retirement line.

[Paulie]

6. Yes, it was Al

bush lied

[youngred]

7. that's what I thought

:shrug:

[revcarol]

9. Blushes. Good zinger, Al!!

Dennis is such a deep thinker that one word answers just won't do.
He sees this as a way for the Republicans to raid the treasury for their corporate buddies. A way to militarize society and stifle dissent, so that there can be further war and profits. Etc. Look at the PNAC site. They outline their objectives. Bush and the hawks want to threaten the world so that the U. S. can rape it at will.

[boobooday]

4. An acknowledgement

I think Kucinich is acknowledging that there were even bigger reasons than oil.

It is about looting. It is about setting up a permanent vacuum sucking taxpayer dollars straight our of our pockets to the defense contractors -- Halliburton, Bechtel, Carlyle, etc. I came to understand that the outcome of the war in Iraq meant nothing to them -- they knew (or thought) there would be no major resistance. But all they really had to do was create the mess, and then sit back and collect their paychecks, which are now guaranteed for probably ten years or so.

http://www.wgoeshome.com

[tinanator]

10. Stealing oil isnt a crime for Bushcorp, but lying about your ruse to US is

Rather than overstating a truism, he attacks at the crux. Bush lies about WMD's are directly tied to ever increasing US fatalities. Sure he tailors his comments to the venue. He is so adept and smart about it, you can only respect his judgement. I expect his strategies can pay off if we all pull for it and show a little faith in each other.

[RichM]

5. It was Sharpton that made the crack about Bush's retirement, but your

question is very on-target anyhow. (Check the transcript -- I'm pretty sure it was actually Sharpton.) However, DK got the chance to handle the same question, and did indeed sort of take a pass on it.

Two days ago, I saw Dennis here live at UC Berkeley. One of the very first things he said was, "OK, Berkeley, tell me in one word what the real motivation for going into Iraq was." Everyone yelled "OIL!" Then he cupped his hand to his ear and said, "I can't hear you. Tell me again." Everyone yelled "OIL!!" even louder. Then he said, "We have to keep yelling that so they can hear it, all across the country."

Now, as you rightly observe, he had a great chance to say the same thing tonight, when the question "Why would Bush lie?" came up. But he took a pass on it.

I can only conclude, having seen him now about 7 times in person, that there are certain things he will say in person to a live audience, that he is not quite willing to say on TV. I say this even though I am totally a DK supporter, and am working very hard for his campaign. (I was even out canvassing for him TODAY for hours before the debate.) IOW, he is still a politician, making judgements about what is prudent to say, in different kinds of situations. He low-keyed the mention of oil tonight. If you look at the transcript, you'll see he MENTIONED the word, but it was more or less buried in a bunch of rapid sentences about his plan to get us out of Iraq.

For example, when I saw him here in December, he said to a live audience at a union hall, "The corporate media helped lie us into war!" That's what he really thinks. But that is the type of thing he apparently judges as a bit "too hot" to say on national TV.

[plurality]

8. Because it's about more than oil

It's about bringing to heel any and all nations that don't allow Western companies to control their economies. It's about making the 'non-aligned' nations line up with the western economic system. It's about ending the Islamic model of finance that prohibits interest and that relies on value based currencies. Look at all the other contracts that we gave out, health care, education, communications, etc. Look at all the 'rougue nations'. What do all of them have in common? They're all outside of the current global order. We're much closer to a world government than you think. Once these nations are brought to heel the order will be complete, and the world government will be a corporate one, not a political one.