Sunday, September 30, 2007  Greenspan explained  I suspect there
are still quite a few "blood for oil" conspiracists who are in
whoops over a quote from Greenspan's recent autobiography:
Greenspan clarified his remarks in an interview with the
Washington Post, telling the newspaper that although securing
global oil supplies was "not the administration's motive," he
had presented the White House with a case for why removing
Hussein was important for the global economy. Not only this, but
Greenspan (like most rational actors on the global stage)
believed that Saddam Hussein had WMD - he just thought there
were other good reasons to get rid of him as well: So he was
simply saying that if the Middle East didn't have a lot of oil
we would be less interested in it (which doesn't seem to be an
earth-shattering statement). One could add to that, that the
Middle East would probably have less intractable problems if it
didn't sit on so much oil. Ed Morrissey spells it out: In
general, Greenspan has it right. People hav