Greenspan memoirs: Iraq war was for oil

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Kidicious
I don't really see it as a discussion. He's just another citizen you can see what is so obvious.

I don't think DD was referring to the ongoing discussion about whether we should have invaded, but rather to the discussions among top national security officials in the lead-up to the war.

He'd have to have been privy to these discussions to make any revelatory "declaration" about their original intentions, and I can't see why he would have been.

[Kidlicious]

Whoha?

You a monetarist?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Darius871


I don't think DD was referring to the ongoing discussion about whether we should have invaded, but rather to the discussions among top national security officials in the lead-up to the war.

He'd have to have been privy to these discussions to make any revelatory "declaration" about their original intentions, and I can't see why he would have been.

The Fed is usually not involved in that type of discussion, in fact they probably have never been involved in such discussion.

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Kidicious
The Fed is usually not involved in that type of discussion, in fact they probably have never been involved in such discussion.

That's exactly my point Kid, and what DD appeared to be getting at. Greenspan's opinion on the issue would be about as informed and relevant as that of the Surgeon General, so I don't see how it's news.

Now if someone actually in the know like Powell, Armitage, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Tenet, etc. suddenly has a crisis of conscience and drops a bomb to the media, then we'd have something.

[Barnabas]

Well, I dont think his opinion on the Iraq war matters more than that of a random dude, but I think his opinion on Bush economics are interesting.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Darius871


That's exactly my point Kid, and what DD appeared to be getting at. Greenspan's opinion on the issue would be about as informed and relevant as that of the Surgeon General, so I don't see how it's news.

Now if someone actually in the know like Powell, Armitage, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Tenet, etc. suddenly has a crisis of conscience and drops a bomb to the media, then we'd have something.

I don't know if you guys read anything more than Spikes thread title. I think you have a wrong impression.

[Whoha]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Whoha?

You a monetarist?

Yes.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Whoha


Yes.

Do you think the economy could function with wildly fluctuating interest rates like that, or do you think if they tried it again that interest rates wouldn't fluctuate wildly?

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Kidicious
I don't know if you guys read anything more than Spikes thread title. I think you have a wrong impression.

No. As I already wrote above, I read the article as well as a a more Iraq-focused article linked to it. In both instances it says nothing about Greenspan stating his personal opinions on the issue, but rather a "declaration" on his part about what the original intentions actually were. That implies that he somehow knows more material facts than those already available to the general public, but you yourself concede that he doesn't.

I can "opine" that the moon is made of green cheese, but I can't "declare" that it is. You're smart enough to know the difference.

[SlowwHand]

No.

[Darius871]

He isn't?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Darius871


No. As I already wrote above, I read the article as well as a a more Iraq-focused article linked to it. In both instances it says nothing about Greenspan stating his personal opinions on the issue, but rather a "declaration" on his part about what the original intentions actually were. That implies that he somehow knows more material facts than those already available to the general public, but you yourself concede that he doesn't.

I can "opine" that the moon is made of green cheese, but I can't "declare" that it is. You're smart enough to know the difference.

“I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil,” he says.

I think the writer used inappropriate language.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
No.

[SlowwHand]

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Kidicious
“I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil,” he says.

I think the writer used inappropriate language.

ac·knowl·edge
[ak-nol-ij]
–verb (used with object), -edged, -edg·ing.
1. to admit to be real or true; recognize the existence, truth, or fact of