Clusterfuck Nation by Jim Kunstler

Kunstler rightly brings up the issue of oil as the "elephant in the room" in debates about withdrawing from Iraq.

From the article:

Unless an anti-war opposition has a plan to withdraw from the project of suburban sprawl, we're going to have to keep soldiers in Iraq, if not in the cities, then out in desert bases guarding the oil works and keeping planes ready to fly in case some al-Zarqawi-type maniac mounts a coup in Saudi Arabia. It would certainly be legitimate for the Democratic party to oppose the idea that we can continue to be crippled by car-dependency, or that we ought to keep subsidizing that way of life -- which Vice-president Cheney called "non-negotiable." We'd better negotiate that or somebody else is going to negotiate it for us, and that is exactly what they are doing with IED's in Iraq and elsewhere.

As I've noted time and time again, there is no plan to ever withdraw completely from Iraq. U.S. domination of the Middle East's oil, with the requisite military bases to guarantee enforcement, has been part of the plan for decades -- not just since the Neocons took over.

Anyone with a lick of sense knew this occupation would be a nightmare, and the talk of Iraqis throwing sweets and flowers was a joke even to the Bush/Cheney cabal.

The creation of a quagmire is intentional. The creation of more terrorists via torture is intentional -- after all, you can't fight a war without an ever-replenishing supply of enemies to kill. What looks like incompetence and poor planning to the untrained eye is actually brilliant strategizing. Congratulations, Rove, Cheney, Feith, and Wolfowitz -- you've gotten the prize and hoodwinked the populace.

The goal, quite simply, is permanent occupation. As a modicum of stability returns to Iraq (via a puppet government), some troops will be withdrawn to placate the growing calls to bring them home. But U.S. military bases will remain, in perpetuity.

It's the oil, stupid.