What if Bush is smarter than he looks?
Gateway Pundit: Brits & Saudi Arabia Join to Attack Iran
Let's face it. President Bush is not a popular president. His invasion of Iraq, and the quagmire we find ourselve in because of it, has got to be one of the biggest boondoggles of his political career.
But history may prove him right.
Read the link I posted, then read my comment. Think about it. Allegedly, al Qaeda is funded in a major way by prominent people in Saudi Arabia. The US is dependent on Saudi Arabia because of its oil. Bush wants to not be dependent on "foreign oil," so he wants to do exploratory oil drilling in the natural preserve in Alaska. Tax bills have been passed to help promote fuel-efficient vehicles and hybrid cars. We're also doggedly trying to stabilize Iraq (a leading exporter of oil, behind Saudi Arabia and--I think--Venezuela).
Why? Is it simply because of the oil? Recent history should show that our invasion of Iraq has disrupted the oil industry (oh, okay, it's made the oil barons even richer). So I'm not so sure it has to do with oil money.
Let's take it the next step. We're no longer on Saudi Arabia. We have found gangs of oil in Alaska, and Iraq is relatively stable (despite the foreign militants still bombing places, many of which are from Saudi Arabia, apparently--why would Saudi militants want Iraq unstable--they're not just killing American soldiers--they're predominantly killing IRAQIS). We have only admonished Iran for its nuclear program, so Iran is stable.
We take out Saudi Arabia, becuase it IS a huge supporter of al Qaeda.
Surprise!
If this is true, or something close to it, and it cripples al Qaeda so horribly, President Bush will go down as one of the most strategic and wise presidents of history. Unpopular as hell, but maybe Bush knows something we don't. Maybe we should give him the benefit of the doubt.
Let's face it. President Bush is not a popular president. His invasion of Iraq, and the quagmire we find ourselve in because of it, has got to be one of the biggest boondoggles of his political career.
But history may prove him right.
Read the link I posted, then read my comment. Think about it. Allegedly, al Qaeda is funded in a major way by prominent people in Saudi Arabia. The US is dependent on Saudi Arabia because of its oil. Bush wants to not be dependent on "foreign oil," so he wants to do exploratory oil drilling in the natural preserve in Alaska. Tax bills have been passed to help promote fuel-efficient vehicles and hybrid cars. We're also doggedly trying to stabilize Iraq (a leading exporter of oil, behind Saudi Arabia and--I think--Venezuela).
Why? Is it simply because of the oil? Recent history should show that our invasion of Iraq has disrupted the oil industry (oh, okay, it's made the oil barons even richer). So I'm not so sure it has to do with oil money.
Let's take it the next step. We're no longer on Saudi Arabia. We have found gangs of oil in Alaska, and Iraq is relatively stable (despite the foreign militants still bombing places, many of which are from Saudi Arabia, apparently--why would Saudi militants want Iraq unstable--they're not just killing American soldiers--they're predominantly killing IRAQIS). We have only admonished Iran for its nuclear program, so Iran is stable.
We take out Saudi Arabia, becuase it IS a huge supporter of al Qaeda.
Surprise!
If this is true, or something close to it, and it cripples al Qaeda so horribly, President Bush will go down as one of the most strategic and wise presidents of history. Unpopular as hell, but maybe Bush knows something we don't. Maybe we should give him the benefit of the doubt.
posted by xanadian at 11:08 AM
1 Comments:
You're right, that's smart. But Bush didn't have to have come up with the idea. I can quite easily imagine him asking the appropriate people "What are our options?"
Post a Comment
<< Home