Alan Greenspan Clarifies His Comment

First Alan Greenspan says the war is largely about oil, now he wants to clarify his remarks.

"I was not saying that that's the administration's motive," Greenspan said in an interview Saturday, "I'm just saying that if somebody asked me, 'Are we fortunate in taking out Saddam?' I would say it was essential."

He said that in his discussions with President Bush and Vice President Cheney, "I have never heard them basically say, 'We've got to protect the oil supplies of the world,' but that would have been my motive." Greenspan said that he made his economic argument to White House officials and that one lower-level official, whom he declined to identify, told him, "Well, unfortunately, we can't talk about oil." Asked if he had made his point to Cheney specifically, Greenspan said yes, then added, "I talked to everybody about that."

Greenspan said he had backed Hussein's ouster, either through war or covert action. "I wasn't arguing for war per se," he said. But "to take [Hussein] out, in my judgment, it was something important for the West to do and essential, but I never saw Plan B" — an alternative to war.

Wow. So…

He never heard President Bush or Vice President Cheney say the war was about oil, or that we had to protect the oil supplies.

He thought it was economically imperative to remove Saddam Hussein from power to protect those supplies.

He backed the removal of Saddam Hussein because of the economic implications.

Face it, Alan Greenspan knows the economy, he knows what makes the markets tick. But he doesn't know war. He is not an expert on military affairs.

So he never saw Plan B. Neither did the other 426 million of us who are not part of the President's cabinet or working at the Pentagon. That doesn't mean there wasn't a plan B.

Thanks for clarifying your "position" Mr. Greenspan.