BP-Led Consortium Wins Iraq Oil Deal

Apparently the US didn't gain control of Iraq's oil by invading in 2003. but the British and China now get lucrative oil contracts in Iraq.
Was it Britain that invaded Iraq in 2003 to gain control of Iraqi oil? British Petroleum is the big winner in this deal.
And always the opportunist, China swoops in for its share. Mining deals in Africa and Australia, oil deals with Venezuala, China is everywhere.

Alan Greenspan claims Iraq war was really for oil
September 16, 2007 http://tinyurl.com/3dnkw3
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.

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. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/a...

==========

Australian Nelson: Oil a factor in Iraq deployment
July 5, 2007 http://tinyurl.com/ywcn24
The Howard Government has today admitted that securing oil supplies is a factor in Australia's continued military involvement in Iraq.
Defence Minister Brendan Nelson said today oil was a factor in Australia's contribution to the unpopular war, as "energy security" and stability in the Middle East would be crucial to the nation's future.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/howard...

==========

U.S. General Abizaid Says 'Of Course It's About Oil'
Oct 16 2007 http://tinyurl.com/32eyzb
Retired General John Abizaid, the former CENTCOM Commander, said on Saturday about the Iraq war that, "Of course it's about oil, we can't really deny that." More from Matt at Think Progress:
Abizaid has previously argued that the U.S. would need "to keep a long-term military presence in Iraq" in order to protect "the free flow of goods and resources" such as oil, but his Stanford comments go much further in pinning oil as a prime motivator for the war.
http://www.kxmb.com/News/Nation/171772.asp

==========

EXECUTIVE ORDER /
EO 13303 /
Effective Date: May 28, 2003 http://tinyurl.com/ca3se

I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, find that the threat of attachment or other judicial process against the Development Fund for Iraq, Iraqi petroleum and petroleum products, and interests therein, and proceeds, obligations, or any financial instruments of any nature whatsoever arising from or related to the sale or marketing thereof, and interests therein, obstructs the orderly reconstruction of Iraq, the restoration and maintenance of peace and security in the country, and the development of political, administrative, and economic institutions in Iraq. This situation constitutes an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States and I hereby declare a national emergency to deal with that threat.
http://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov/displayEO.cfm...

==========

Oil Immunity?
Government denies charges that Bush helped oil companies in Iraq
http://tinyurl.com/2x2cp3
WASHINGTON, October 30, 2003 — On May 22, the U.N. Security Council gathered in New York to approve a resolution lifting sanctions on Iraq, creating a Development Fund for the country and providing limited immunity to corporations involved in oil and gas deals there for the next four years. The resolution directed that proceeds from future sales of Iraqi oil and gas be placed in the development fund and allowed the U.S.-led Coalition Provisional Authority to disburse the funds in consultation with the interim Iraqi administration.
That same day at the White House, President George W. Bush signed Executive Order 13303, which appears to give immunity from any judicial process to every entity with direct or indirect interests in Iraqi petroleum and related products. "The threat of attachment or judicial process against the Development Fund for Iraq, Iraqi petroleum and petroleum products, and interests therein ... constitutes an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States," reads the executive order. It continues, "… any … judicial process is prohibited, and shall be deemed null and void."
Executive Order 13303 went unnoticed outside the government until July, when it was spotted by the Institute for Policy Studies, a liberal think tank.
Since then, accusations have been flying over whether or not the Bush administration has given blanket immunity to the oil industry in Iraq. "The Executive Order is a blank check for corporate anarchy," Tom Devine, legal director of the non-profit Government Accountability Project, wrote in a July 2003 assessment of the order for the Institute. "Its sweeping, unqualified language places industry above domestic and international law for anything related to commerce in Iraqi oil."
"Translated from the legalese, this is a license for corporations to loot Iraq and its citizens," Devine added. http://www.public-i.org/wow/report.aspx...