Friedman--Don't Forget to Blame the Victim, Too

Thomas Friedman in today's New York Times says the Arab world is "cursed" by oil. No mention is made of the historical context. Um, Mr. Friedman, do you have any recollection of, I don't know, the British Mandate, the Balfour Doctrine, French influence in Lebanon, British influence in Iraq (including the formation of the country itself)--indeed, the British literally drew the map when it came to establishing the borders of the modern Middle East. Add to this the meddling by the US in Persia, aka Iran, and I'd say there's a little more to the story than the "curse" of oil versus the industriousness of the people of the Far East, of whom Friedman has laudatory praise.

But why bring up history? It's not like it means anything in the region, right? After all, being the birthplace of "western" civilization is so overrated(sarcasm).

And, you know, as I wound down last night, idly browsing website before turning in, one thing struck me. All this time, Bush, et al, have been calling Saddam Hussein a "threat." I know I've posted about this before, but my thought last night was "a threat to WHAT?" Think about it: Hussein was cut off from a third of the country (Kurdistan). If he was going to do anything aggressive, don't you think he'd start there?

What was he threatening, except a good night's sleep for Dick "Ahab" Cheney and his search for the Great Black Gold? Since Saddam is clearly no longer part of the picture, I think it's high time for the intelligence services to release to the public any information regarding Hussein's so-called threats. Show us the intelligence regarding belligerent intentions and actions towards Iraqi Kurdistan, Iran, Turkey, Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and/or Kuwait. Um--preferably timely intelligence, i.e., something from AFTER 1991. Let the public judge what sort of threat Hussein was.

Something tells me the "threat" was right around zero: an embargoed country doesn't generally have a whole lot to work with. But release the data nonetheless. Because I think it will show that the Iraq war is little more than playing politics, with a nice hefty bonus in the form of crude (which was supposed to "pay the reconstruction costs").

$113 Billion dollars and counting. The oil revenue last year was roughly $8 Billion dollars, or less than a dime on the dollar. That is to say, bankruptcy.

An apt description of the Bush policy.