Home Store In Memoriam Deborah Newsletter Forum Topics Blogfeed Blogroll Facebook MySpace Contact Us About

Greenspan contention that Iraq war is about oil dismissed by FOX military analyst David Hunt, says Greenspan should "stick to economics"

Reported by Chrish - September 17, 2007 -

It was hard to tell the segment on FOX and Friends this morning 9/17/07 was about Alan Greenspan's new book "The Age of Turbulence." The segment was introduced with new graphics acclaiming "On the Hunt", featuring FOX News Analyst Colonel David Hunt; the chyron below for much of the segment read *On the Hunt*, and we were shown and informed of the Colonel's book, titled (you guessed it) "On the Hunt." Hunt dismissed as "urban legnd" the view that the war in Iraq is, at its heart, about oil, and coincidentally dismissed Greenspan's contention that removing Saddam Hussein was "essential to securing world oil supplies." Said Hunt of Greenspan: "$7 million dollars makes you say a lot of things." We're witnessing the Richard Clarke-ing of Alan Greenspan.

Brian Kilmeade first asserted that Alan Greenspan is "backing off" his statements that the war is essentially about oil (He's done no such thing: According to The Washington Post he clarified his stance that

"the removal of Saddam Hussein had been "essential" to secure world oil supplies, a point he emphasized to the White House in private conversations before the 2003 invasion of Iraq" and "In [an] 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." "... 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."

To that "backing off" question Hunt replied that Greenspan "should stick to economics," either not recognizing or diverting from the fact that the global economy is oil-based. You can't talk about one without the other. This insult was overlooked as Hunt went on to repeat the "failed intelligence"/WMD excuse, and he asserted (twice) that it's an urban legend about oil. He proceeded to bash Greenspan (who has been in public service 30 years) saying

"What's interesting about guys who make all this money, is that they forget where they came from. The Bushes gave this guy a LOT of time, as the Director, and it's sad to see this. $7 million makes you say a lot of things."

What Hunt is clearly implying is that Greenspan either doesn't know what he's talking about or is lying, for money, and should have remained loyal to the Bushes.

Hunt reiterated to Gretchen Carlson that "this thing was sold, and we went to it, because of WMD - which turned out to be absolutely, 100% wrong. The intelligence community blew this" and repeated again that it was not about the oil - that's an urban legend.

Kilmeade put forth that 19 million barrels of oil come through the straits of Hormuz every day, and if Hussein ever shut that off, it would be a national security issue for the United States - $120/barrel oil would be an economic hardship (agreed). This Cavuto-esque logic was irrelevant to Hunt, who said that if Hussein ever tried to shut down those straits, we've got the best Navy in the world and would go through it in about 3 seconds. Hunt mixed messages and said the biggest threat was how he (Hussein, presumably) was training terrrrorists inside Iraq, but the biggest issue was WMD, and that had nothing to do with this. He accused Greenspan of "making a lot of money, going on big TV shows, and selling a lot of books" (hmmm, like Ann Coulter?) and it's just not true.

If any of you are not familiar with Hunt, he speaks very fast and in this segment was tripping over himself to get the talking points out.

Asked by Carlson how the troops would react to this. he replied that they wouldn't know about it and inferred they are ignorant, 99% not knowing who Greenspan is (and for that matter, 99% of Americans don't know either, he said). "This kind of news does not get to soldiers," he said.

Now how is it that soldiers are not aware of an historical tome that chronicles the world they are fighting in and for, yet they are demoralized on a regular basis (according to FOX) by anti-war views voiced by actors, singers, and Gold-Star moms?

A few further comments by Hunt:

The impending cut of 30,000 troops promised by Bush and Petraeus was "inevitable," part of the planning when the "surge" was initiated. Unless they extend deployments again, to two years, these troops must come home. "We don't have the guys to continue this."

Hunt railed against the New York Times and MoveOn.org, and like all the "coverage" I've seen on FOX, did not touch once on the content of the ad but only the headline. He's outraged, they're disgraceful, you "can't call a service member betrayer," etc etc. Predictable, righteous, and uninformative. Go FOX.

In his final comments, Hunt said soldiers don't care about the politics and such going on at home; they care about their work, their buddies, and their mission. Unless someone wants "to use them as a backdrop," they don't get into this stuff.

Overall, Hunt was the first of many on FOX today to attack Alan Greenspan's integrity and intelligence because he dared to speak the unspeakable: it's the oil, stupid.