Greenspan on clinton and bush

[Murffieus]

Venezuala Oil is a but a blip compared to the Mid East oil supply. Hugo Chavez's day of reckoning will come if he keeps up following in Fidel's footsteps-----remember Noriega!

[Murffieus]

You won't find this in the liberal press, but in the Wall Street Journal today, Greenspan says this about the Democrats in his book:

"The next Administration may have the Clinton name, but the democrat party has moved very significantly to the left". He also says that "it was very important to get Saddam out of there ----not because of WMD, but because Saddam wanted to control the straits of Hormuz". also says he doesn't have the classified information that GWB has access to.

No mention of any of that on 60 minutes last night or anywhere else on the Sunday talk shows or the network news casts-----all you hear is his lamenting the Bush deficits and saying the Iraq war is mainly about oil!

[77ncaachamps]

You won't find this in the liberal press, but in the Wall Street Journal today, Greenspan says this about the Democrats in his book:

"The next Administration may have the Clinton name, but the democrat party has moved very significantly to the left". He also says that "it was very important to get Saddam out of there ----not because of WMD, but because Saddam wanted to control the straits of Hormuz". also says he doesn't have the classified information that GWB has access to.

No mention of any of that on 60 minutes last night or anywhere else on the Sunday talk shows or the network news casts-----all you hear is his lamenting the Bush deficits and saying the Iraq war is mainly about oil!

But the Straits of Hormuz IS about oil.

When the book comes out, it will be interesting to read a lot of his opinions and insights as a confidant of a couple of US Presidents.

He is not a god, but seeing how much of his words have an impact in this word, it is interesting to hear him.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Apparently even at 81 and married to Andrea Mitchell, a moment of lucidity can occur

Mviale and others will be deeply disappointed.  A quick check at dummysunderground and dailycommunist (dailykos) revealed near suicide responses.

Sunday's interview


In the interview, he clarified that sentence in his 531-page book, saying that while securing global oil supplies was "not the administration's motive," he had presented the White House with the case for why removing Hussein was important for the global economy.

"I was not saying that that's the administration's motive," Greenspan said in an interview Saturday, "I'm just saying that if somebody asked me, 'Are we fortunate in taking out Saddam?' I would say it was essential."

Given that, "I'm saying taking Saddam out was essential," he said. But he added that he was not implying that the war was an oil grab.

"No, no, no," he said. Getting rid of Hussein achieved the purpose of "making certain that the existing system [of oil markets] continues to work, frankly, until we find other [energy supplies], which ultimately we will."



Greenspan ALSO SAID


As for Iraq, Greenspan said that at the time of the invasion, he believed, like Bush, that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction "because Saddam was acting so guiltily trying to protect something." While he was "reasonably sure he did not have an atomic weapon," he added, "my view was that if we do nothing, eventually he would gain control of a weapon."



Marc and others can now start their plaintif wail

[Murffieus]

NCAa----Of course the Staits Of Hormuz is about oil----and that's (as I say above) a big reason why we're in Iraq!

To blockade Iran's exports and to guarantee safe passage for Saudi Oil----we need to control Hormuz!