Alan Greenspan claims Iraq war was really for oil
Brödtext: From The Sunday Times
September 16, 2007
Alan Greenspan claims Iraq war was really for oil
Graham Paterson

AMERICA’s elder statesman of finance, Alan Greenspan, has shaken the White House by declaring that the prime motive for the war in Iraq was oil.

In his long-awaited memoir, to be published tomorrow, Greenspan, a Republican whose 18-year tenure as head of the US Federal Reserve was widely admired, will also deliver a stinging critique of President George W Bush’s economic policies.

However, it is his view on the motive for the 2003 Iraq invasion that is likely to provoke the most controversy. “I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil,” he says.

Greenspan, 81, is understood to believe that Saddam Hussein posed a threat to the security of oil supplies in the Middle East.

Britain and America have always insisted the war had nothing to do with oil. Bush said the aim was to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction and end Saddam’s support for terrorism.

'Housing boom over' as UK bank chaos grows

· Economist warns of sharp downturn
· Tory leader attacks Brown over crisis

Heather Stewart and Lisa Bachelor
Sunday September 16, 2007
The Observer

Britain's house price growth will be halved next year as the global financial crisis exacerbates the impact of rising mortgage rates, according to Nationwide, the biggest mortgage lender.

After the dramatic bail-out of high street bank Northern Rock underlined the impact of the American 'sub-prime' mortgage crisis on Britain's financial sector, Fionnuala Earley, Nationwide's group economist, said she expected house price inflation to slow to around 3 per cent next year.

Thousands of anxious customers queued outside Northern Rock branches for a second day yesterday, ignoring calls for calm from the Chancellor, Alistair Darling, and the bank's management, and sparking fears of a full-blown 'run' on the bank.

Speaking to Channel 4 News last night, Darling said he had been assured by the Financial Services Authority that Northern Rock was capable of meeting its financial obligations to its customers.

In the first signs of political fallout from the crisis, David Cameron accused Gordon Brown of failing to rein in public and private borrowing over the last decade, saying the nation's economic growth is based on a 'mountain of debt'. Writing in today's Sunday Telegraph, the Tory leader says: 'This government has presided over a huge expansion of public and private debt without showing awareness of the risks involved.

'Though the current crisis may have had its trigger in the United States... under Labour our economic growth has been built on a mountain of debt.'

House price growth was running at just below 10 per cent in August, but Nationwide believes it will have dropped to 7 per cent by December and continue slowing throughout next year.

The worldwide credit crunch that pushed Northern Rock to the brink of collapse could make a housing market slowdown worse, Earley warned. 'I think all it can do is make it [the market] cooler: that comes through sentiment, and through expectations.'

With base interest rates at a six-year high of 5.75 per cent, economists said that the feelgood factor was already evaporating and that the Northern Rock crisis could deal a fresh blow to confidence.

'This confirms some of the fears that people had, and reinforces the idea that they need to be more circumspect, and that money is tighter,' said Richard Hyman, director of retail research firm Verdict.

'It couldn't have come at a worse time: consumer confidence was already heading south,' said Kevin Hawkins, director general of the British Retail Consortium, though he added that, as long as Northern Rock was the only casualty, the effects could be short-lived.

A report from property website Rightmove, released on Friday, showed that property prices fell in the last month for the first time in three years. It is expected that, although there will be overall growth in the housing market, some areas of the UK could suffer significant price decline.

Meanwhile, Northern Rock apologised to customers last night, saying it was 'disappointed to see uncertainty caused'. The apology came amid growing speculation of a takeover bid, with HSBC and Lloyds TSB both being mooted as potential suitors. Insiders are predicting that a takeover could occur within weeks to secure the bank's future. One plan currently being looked at by City bankers is to divide the company's £100 billion mortgage portfolio between some of the major banks.

Savers have been rushing to pull out their cash since it emerged last Thursday that Darling had sanctioned an emergency loan from the Bank of England to prevent Northern Rock going bust.

One couple had even camped outside Northern Rock's Cheltenham branch in Gloucestershire overnight, desperate to withdraw the £1m proceeds of a house sale. 'We were told that because our money was in an online account we wouldn't be able to withdraw it there and then,' said Fiona Howard. 'That money is our lifeline, as we are living in rented accommodation at present.'

Official: Russian fuel ready for Iran
By Nasser Karimi, Associated Press Writer | September 16, 2007

TEHRAN, Iran --Enriched uranium fuel is ready to be shipped from Russia to Iran's first nuclear power plant, state television on Sunday quoted Iran's foreign minister as saying.

The announcement comes after talks in Moscow between minister Manouchehr Mottaki and Russian nuclear chief Sergei Kiriyenko to address delays in completing the $1 billion joint Iranian-Russian Bushehr power plant.

"Nuclear fuel for this power plant, inspected and sealed by the International Atomic Energy Agency, is ready," the broadcast quoted Mottaki as saying late on Saturday. "We do see the trend of cooperation between Iran and Russia moving ahead for the Bushehr power plant."

The project, Iran's first nuclear power plant, has been beset by repeated delays due to payment problems on the Iranian side, according to the Russians. Tehran, however, maintains it is because Moscow has been caving into Western pressure to halt the project.

The U.S. maintains that Iran's nuclear power program is a cover for developing weapons and has called for further sanctions, while Tehran denies the charges and insists it just wants to master the technology to meet future power needs under the provisions of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

While Russia has continued to oppose a U.S. push for tougher sanctions against Tehran, Russian officials have shown growing irritation with Iran's refusal to freeze its own uranium enrichment effort. Moscow appears to be using its control over the Bushehr project to press Iran for concessions on its nuclear program.

A European diplomat last month said that Moscow had warned Tehran it would not deliver fuel to the plant unless Tehran lifts the veil of secrecy on suspicious past atomic activities. The IAEA has since reported increased cooperation from the Iranians over its program.

Iran currently has the ability to enrich small amounts of uranium for nuclear fuel but still nowhere near enough to power a nuclear plant, much less create a weapon, but Tehran has made it clear it is developing its enrichment capacity.

Russian officials say the plant cannot open until six months after the current fuel is delivered.

Enriched to a low degree, uranium is used as a reactor fuel; higher enrichment creates material for a nuclear warhead.

One solution that has been suggested to the controversy over Iran's nuclear program is for it to abandon its efforts to enrich uranium and just buy the necessary fuel from Russia.

In a separate report, state television said that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had offered his country's nuclear knowledge to Saudi Arabia.



© Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: Charles Copeland
Date: Sep 16, 2007 3:18 PM
War with Iran Scheduled for This Week???

I normally do not stoop to posting crap from that birdcage liner newspaper called the Jerusalem Post, but when the "news" comes right from the horse's mouth, you'd better at least listen...

Check out the part I highlighted. It says it all...

Also, by the way, just how does Bush and his associates plan to declare war on ANY nation??? He has no goddamn say in declarations of war. CONGRESS does. Has he forgotten that little tidbit???
_____________________________________________________________
Gates: US favors diplomacy with Iran

Sunday 16 Sep 2007

Source: The Jerusalem Post

The nuclear Iranian crisis forces the world "to prepare for the worst" which "is war," French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said Sunday evening, while emphasizing that negotiations should still be the preferred course of action.

Vice President Dick Cheney, President George W. Bush, and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in Washington.
Photo: AP [file] , AP

Kouchner, quoted by French daily Le Figaro, added that "Iran does whatever it pleases in Iraq ... one cannot find in the entire world a crisis greater than this one."

Kouchner's statements came just hours after US Defense Secretary Robert Gates reiterated the Bush administration's commitment, at least for the time being, to using diplomatic and economic means to counter the potential nuclear threat from Iran.

Speculation has persisted about preparations for a military strike against Iran for its alleged support for terrorism and its nuclear program.

Gates, in a broadcast interview, said he would not discuss "hypotheticals" about what President George W. Bush "may or may not do."

"I think that the administration believes at this point that continuing to try and deal with the Iranian threat, the Iranian challenge, through diplomatic and economic means is by far the preferable approach. That's the one we are using," the Pentagon chief said.

"We always say all options are on the table, but clearly, the diplomatic and economic approach is the one that we are pursuing," he added.

The diplomatic approach takes center stage at a conference in Washington on Friday. The US hosts the UN Security Council's four other permanent members - Britain, China, France, Russia - plus Germany to press for new penalties against oil-rich Iran.

But earlier Sunday, the Daily Telegraph reported that Bush and his associates were seriously considering declaring war on Iran and have even listed specific facilities that would be targeted in such an event, while Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has slowly given up the idea of finding a diplomatic solution to the country's persistence in enriching uranium.

According to senior US defense and intelligence officials that spoke with the Telegraph, the Pentagon has gathered a list of up to 2,000 targets including a major base run by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Quds Force in the south.

Pentagon and CIA officers said that such a war would come to pass as a result of a "carefully calibrated program of escalation" that would lead to a "military showdown with Iran," the officials told the newspaper.

This scenario could arise once it was apparent that diplomatic efforts with the country were hopeless. When Iran would be internationally denounced for its interference in Iraq, the US could conduct cross border raids on Iranian training camps and bomb factories.

The report said that the raids would provoke a "major Iranian response" that could result in a halt to Gulf oil supplies; this in turn, said experts, would provide legitimacy to strike Iran's nuclear facilities and armed forces.

An intelligence officer noted that the US military had "two major contingency plans" for air strikes on Iran.

"One is to bomb only the nuclear facilities. The second option is for a much bigger strike that would - over two or three days - hit all of the significant military sites as well. This plan involves more than 2,000 targets."

The Pentagon has isolated its main target as the Fajr Garrison in Ahwaz - where it is believed that Iran manufactures self-propelled missiles used against coalition forces in Iraq.

A source told the Telegraph that "a strike will probably follow a gradual escalation. Over the next few weeks and months the US will build tensions and evidence around Iranian activities in Iraq."

Meanwhile, the Telegraph claimed that Rice was prepared to come to an agreement with Vice-President Dick Cheney and consent to military action against Iran.

Rice has been pressured by "senior counter-proliferation officials" to admit that military action may be necessary, a State Department official told the newspaper. She is now working with Cheney to "find a way to reconcile their positions and present a united front to the President."

By HOPE YEN, Associated Press Writer2 hours, 22 minutes ago

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Sunday he would recommend a veto of a Senate proposal that would give troops more rest between deployments in Iraq, branding it a dangerous "backdoor way" to draw down forces.

Democrats pledged to push ahead with the plan by Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., and expressed confidence they could round up the votes to pass it, although perhaps not by the margin to override a veto.

"The operational tempo that our forces are under is excruciatingly difficult for our soldiers, Marines, all of our personnel and their families," said Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I. "They deserve the same amount of time back home as they stay in the field."

The comments represented the latest political clash over the future course of the war. Last week, President Bush announced plans for a limited drawdown but indicated that combat forces would stay in Iraq well past 2008.

With the Senate expected to resume debate this week on anti-war legislation, Gates sharpened his criticism of Webb's proposal. It would require troops get as much time at their home station as their deployments to the war front.

Gates was asked in broadcast interviews about recommending a veto to Bush should the proposal pass. "Yes I would," the Pentagon chief said.

"If it were enacted, we would have force management problems that would be extremely difficult and, in fact, affect combat effectiveness and perhaps pose greater risk to our troops," he said.

Supporters of Webb's proposal say it has at least 57 of the 60 votes needed for passage. It would need 67 votes to override a veto.

A separate proposal by Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., seeks to restrict the mission of troops to fighting terrorist and training the Iraqi security force.

"The president has dangled a carrot in front of the American people talking about troop reductions," Levin said. "But, again, it is an illusion of a change of course and the American people are not buying it. My colleagues are not buying it."

"I think we have a good chance of getting to the 60 votes to call for a change in policy. I hope we get there in the next couple of weeks," he said.

If Webb's amendment were enacted, Gates said it would force him to consider again extending tours in Iraq. He explained that the military commanders would be constrained in the use of available forces, creating gaps and forcing greater use of an already strained National Guard and Reserve.

"It would be extremely difficult for us to manage that. It really is a backdoor way to try and force the president to accelerate the drawdown," Gates said. "Again, the drawdowns have to be based on the conditions on the ground."

"We would have to be looking at gapping units where there would — a unit pulling out would not be immediately replaced by another," he added. "So you'd have an area of combat operations where no U.S. forces would be present for a period, and the troops coming in would then face a much more difficult situation."

Active-duty Army units today are on 15-month deployments with a promise of no more than 12 months rest. Marines who spend seven or more months at war sometimes get six months or less at home.

"We're having difficulty trying to keep to my policy of 15 months deployed, 12 months at home, for the active force and a full-year mobilization limit on the Guard and Reserve. We're having enough trouble trying to make that work, without the strictures of legislation," Gates said.

Bush said last week that he had approved a plan by Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, to withdraw 5,700 troops from Iraq by the holidays and reduce the force from 20 combat brigades to 15 brigades by next July.

The president has ordered Petraeus to make a further assessment and fresh recommendations in March. There are about 169,000 U.S. troops in Iraq today.

Gates on Friday raised the possibility of cutting troop levels to 100,000 or so by the end of next year, well beyond the cuts Bush announced, in what appeared to be a conciliatory gesture to anti-war Democrats and some wary Republicans who are pushing for troop reductions and an end to the war.

But on Sunday, Gates said he could not say how large the force would be in the coming years, stressing that it would depend on conditions on the ground and whether the security situation in Iraq had improved dramatically.

In the long term, Gates said, U.S. forces would focus on border security, fighting terrorists and training and equipping Iraqi security forces.

"The idea is that we would have a much more limited role in Iraq for some protracted period of time, a stabilizing force, a force that would be a fraction of the size of what we have there now," Gates said.

Bush has compared America's future in Iraq to the peacekeeping role U.S. troops play in South Korea, where they have been stationed for some five decades.

Gates, meanwhile, said he disagreed with assertions by former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan in his new book that the Iraq war "is largely about oil."

"I've known him a long time and I disagree with that," Gates said. "I wasn't here for the decision-making process that initiated it, that started the war. I know the same allegation was made about the Gulf War in 1991 and I just don't believe it's true," he said.

"It's really about stability in the Gulf. It's about rogue regimes trying to develop weapons of mass destruction. It's about aggressive dictators," Gates said. "After all, Saddam Hussein launched wars against several of his neighbors. He was trying to develop weapons of mass destruction, certainly when we went in, in 1991."

Gates spoke on "Fox News Sunday" and "This Week" on ABC. Reed was on ABC and Levin appeared on "Face the Nation" on CBS.

----------------- Bulletin Message -----------------
From: The Truth - SPREAD It!
Date: Sep 16, 2007 7:23 PM


http://today.reuters.com/news/article ... _0_US-IRAN-USA-DEBATE.xml

Iran leader repeats challenge to debate Bush at U.N.
Sun Sep 16, 2007 5:40pm ET
By Parisa Hafezi

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad challenged U.S. President George W. Bush to a debate on global issues at a U.N. summit in New York, state TV reported on Sunday, repeating a call rejected by Washington last year.

"I had suggested holding a debate. I am saying again that let us discuss global concerns at the (U.N.) General Assembly in front of representatives of other nations," Ahmadinejad told state television.

The White House rejected Ahmadinejad's last year call for a presidential debate, calling it a "diversion".

Ahmadinejad is due to visit New York for the opening of the United Nations General Assembly in September. It will be his third visit since he took office in August 2005.

During his interview with the state television, Ahmadinejad also condemned U.S. policies in the Middle East, including Iraq.

"I am ready to hold talks with Bush on important global issues at the assembly," he said. "Let us hold talks about Iraq and other issues. Then public opinion will judge ... We will offer our global solutions."

The United States severed relations after Tehran's 1979 Islamic revolution which toppled the U.S.-backed Shah.

Washington accuses Shi'ite Muslim Iran of providing funds, arms and training to Iraqi Shi'ite militants and of supporting terrorism across the Middle East. Iran denies the charge and blames the U.S.-led invasion in 2003 for the bloodshed between Iraq's majority Shi'ite and minority Sunni Arabs.

Tehran and Washington have held talks in Baghdad to find ways to restore security there but ties are still very strained.

They are also at odds over Tehran's disputed nuclear work. The United States accuses Iran of covertly trying to build nuclear arms under cover of a civilian program. Iran denies this, saying it needs the technology to generate electricity.

Iran has so far refused to halt sensitive nuclear work, despite U.S. threats to ratchet up pressure with new U.N. sanctions. Two rounds of sanctions have already been imposed.

"Of course we will not abandon our right to nuclear technology," Ahmadinejad said. "We have obtained the technology to enrich uranium. We are at industrial level. Why should we abandon our activities?"

Washington is leading a drive for a third sanctions resolution. World powers are set to meet in Washington on September 21 to discuss a new resolution.

Gaston, försök få med länken till originalartikeln utifall man vill spara den..