Here is a terrific, evidence based summary of our duplicitous governments' dirty oil regime:
http://www.globalpolicy.org/component/content/article/185/40586.html
Monied power controls global conflict; the common men living under the filthy rich dictators have no chance of complaint.
All the more reason those of us who have freedom of speech and press must focus and refocus attention on the scoundrels' true motivations.
Bravo to the Hard Facts Crue, for continuing to feature these Stop the Press commentaries. Never let the bastards get you down.
Even though I've said that we were in the right in the first gulf war I don't doubt that those in charge had other motives. It was just that their aims happened to coincide with what I felt was 'the right thing to do'.
I don't know what to call my political position these days. Somewhere in between communism and anarchism I suppose. (not that either of those ever worked anyway)
I despise politicians and believe that corruption is inevitable. The ones willing to do anything to get elected have an in built advantage over those with moral scruples. Natural selection pretty much guarantees that we get the most immoral leaders possible.
Capitalism has the same problem and also contains it's own basic flaw. The directors of a company are supposed to do what is best for the shareholders. There is no reward for taking anything else into account.
So we get ruled by the worst of each. In each others pockets and making up the rules as they go along.
I just about trust myself (on my better days 
) but I wouldn't know how to get us out of this current situation even if you made me emperor of the western world. As we've seen there is no reasonable compromise that can be made.
Inventing a replacement for oil would help. At least then we'd have the option of just walking away.
Oh and a cure for religion would go a long way too since that is part of the problem there.
"Inventing a replacement for oil would help."
Indeed yes. That is the topic of much speculation, wondering what the next resource of almighty power may be. If the next generation of engines runs on hydrogen, will the corporations be pillaging the water? In which case, the desert sheiks will be fresh out of luck.
xXxXx
Both the US and the UK powers-that-be are up to their blood-bathed elbows in petroleum wealth. The UK government of 2003 didn't need to be strong-armed into invading Iraq; not with British Petroleum [fourth largest company on planet Earth] leading the way. The multiple meetings between US and UK lawyers weren't addressing "whether" to invade, because that already had been decided. And undoubtedly it wasn't the legality of the invasion that was being debated. No, it was how best to legalize the looting of the oil fields that was requiring the bilateral Top Attorneys' legal attention.
As the Wicked Witch of the West once said, "These things must be done delicately."
It was all about how best to decorate such measures as US Executive Order 13303 and UN Security Council Resolution 1483, to make them look pretty in support of truth justice freedom liberation peace beauty prosperity, when they came to light.
Rather than appearing in their true guise as Laws Abetting Petroleum Takeover.
Lord Goldsmith is squirming, because he cant very comfortably point to that in a public forum. And no matter how the Chilcot Inquiry organizes its political sniping, I imagine the topic of British Petroleum is mostly off limits.
By the way. Is there a UK equivalent of Executive Order 13303? Or were Blair et all just going to point to UN SCR 1483 as sufficient unto the day for the pillage and plunder thereof?
I haven't heard reference to ex order 13303 or UN 1483. UN 1441 has cropped up a few times though.
Exactly my point Eccles. 1441 was about disarmament, the whole lovely facade of liberation truth justice blah blah blah.
Neither your government nor mine, present nor past will snipe at the true villains, the Petroleum Powers. The oil magnates don't get voted out of office, and they are the puppet masters of us all.
Am embarrassed to say that I don't even know if we have the equivalent to an Executive Order here. I'm familiar with the term from American books and news, but here it seems to just be 'the Prime Minister has decided'
We have 'Orders in Council' where 'The Queen has decided' though I doubt she knows or cares that she has.