FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
When it comes to the real reason for the Iraq war, we've pretty much heard it all: First it was WMD, then it was about the war on terror and removing Saddam Hussein, then it was about spreading democracy. But it was never about the oil.
Now, as Bill Moyers reported on PBS: "...one by one, these concocted rationales went up in smoke, fire and ashes. And now the bottom line turns out to be ... the bottom line. It is about oil."
More than 5 years after the start of the war, the U.S. has lost more than 4,100 troops, tens of thousands more are wounded for life, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis are dead, millions more are displaced, and the U-S taxpayer is stuck with a bill that could top trillions of dollars. And, what about the oil? Well, it hit a new record high today of more than $143 a barrel. Gas prices are up almost 38% from a year ago.
The New York Times reports that the Bush administration played a key role in drawing up no-bid contracts between the Iraqi government and five major Western oil companies to develop some of the largest fields in Iraq. Critics accuse the administration of making sure Western companies get this access in the country that holds the third-largest oil reserves in the world. For example, Russian companies with experience in Iraq were hoping for contracts, but they're still waiting.
The White House denies steering the Iraqis toward any decisions. A State Department official says its advice was "not binding."
Here’s my question to you: Do you believe the Iraq war was about oil all along?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Andrew from Arnold, Missouri writes:
The war was always about the oil. When it became obvious that Saddam Hussein wasn't going to share his oil with us, we took him out.
Are you serious? There is no doubt that the main reason for the Iraq war was because of oil. If you look at U.S. history, we don't go into wars unless somebody has done something to us or we have something to gain. We went into Iraq solely for the oil. If we truly cared about human rights, we would be getting rid of governments and imprisoning the people torturing and killing people in Africa.
Doris from Ojai, California writes:
No. According to those who worked closely with Bush, from day one, he wanted to get Saddam for putting a hit on his father.
Mike from Baltimore writes:
Jack, The obvious answer is yes, based on the fact that we have two heroes of Big Oil calling the shots from the White House.
Michael from Lorain, Ohio writes:
Whether the war was about oil or WMD makes no difference now. What the American people are mad about is the lack of accountability. We were told in part that Iraq had WMD and was a threat to our interests. Even though no WMD were found, nobody was held accountable for the mistakes/lies, and thanks to those people we have more than 4,000 dead and 30,000 wounded troops. Not to mention the extreme loss of civilians in Iraq.
I served in the Marine Corps for two tours in Iraq. Even though the missions were always under the heading of Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), we would always call it Operation Iraqi Liberation (OIL). Does that answer your question?
Joe from Ohio writes:
If it was, we're losing.