Perhaps because it never was about seizing their oil? quite a hard sell in this modern world.

Perhaps instead it was simply geo-political realignment, improving the lot of US allies in the region,

...and it didnt hurt the price of oil either, if you happened to have investments along those lines.

The answer is unplug the plugged produceable wells and permit oil production on U.S. territory and Uncle Sam would soon be rolling in genuine prosperity. This Obama et al, do not have a clue and appear to have a deep resentment of those traditional Americans who paved the way after our American Revolution, and are stupidly dismantling those American freedoms and liberty that enabled us and gave us Political freedom and economic chance, under our system to build during the many of the past decades.

"Oil was the motive"
Nope. At best it was secondary or even tertiary motive. The fact that you do not recognize it is very disheartening.

Hold the phone here... didn't we swear up and down that this war was not to gain Iraq's oil, but rather to instill democracy in the middle east, while removing a horrific dictator? Didn't I read over and over and over again that this wasn't about the oil. never was, and never would be?

I spend a lot of time in europe, and have told people over and over again, "It's not about the oil - we are not there to gain there natural resources!" - now, was I a fool for saying so?

If the writer of this piece has different information than I do, aside from tabloid fiction, he's a traitor to the United States for saying this. Shame on him...

Typical far-left, liberal agenda-pushing, wanna-be columnist. Zzzzzzz!

The suggestion that the Iraqi war was fought for oil has always been rediculous: Saddam was more than willing to sell us (or anybody else) all the oil they had. The only reason he couldn't was because of the Embargo that WE set up, because he was thought to have WMD's. If oil was the motive, all we would have had to do is declare that Iraq was WMD-free, and drop the Embargo. & POOF here comes the oil.

Weak analysis, put out by a weak mind, produced by a liberal, socialist, democrat inspired education system. We are in trouble because of them all.

We here in America need to build better cars that can increase the gas mileage to include vehicles that eventually won't realy on oil. It's inevitable if we want to break there hold on dependence of foreign oil.

Wait. . . so all the lives lost and people now suffering from "post-traumatic stress syndrome" would have been worth it if we had gotten oil?

This type of "journalism" is what is wrong with this country. You have made all that has been sacrificed cheaper by putting this nonsense out and calling yourself a journalist. It will be a great day when we can begin to stop blaming one party or another and just work together to try to fix the problems that both the Republicans & the Democrats have put us in. Try to start writing a fully researched and fact filled article.

I was about to make the same argument as "Hale" above (#6) which follows logic, something that Connie Madon does not possess or respect. Maybe she misunderstood that writing for a blog meant she could just slop something down late at night wearing her pajamas. This article smells like somebody was about to miss their deadline. Please file this article under editorials/op-ed.

Alan Greenspan was referring to "oil market stability" not "oil possession" in context.

Come on people, reporting is not rocket science!

The real fact is that it was never about oil. If it was then we are a very stupid people! We go to war for oil and then never get any!

But the reality is that it was never about the oil but about putting down a belligerent dictator who trained radical terrorists, attempted to assasinate a US president, violated UN sanctions, and bribed UN and world officials enabling him to avoid punative actions. Should I remind everyone of the 550 tons of yellow cake uranium that he had? How about his foreign network of agents that would assasinate and purchase chemical, biological and nuclear technology. How about the mysterious Russian special ops team that went into Iraq just before we invaded who went to key military sights picking up who knows what in large trucks that later were sent to Syria. It is ironic how little coverage the mainline media gave about these events - honestly they hardly reported on them.

The left hammered away at Bush claiming he went into Iraq for the oil! It is ironic how quiet they are now! Certainly former President Bush deserves an apology now but he will never get it! It was all about bringing down the conservative movement and setting up the likes of Obama - a naive man lacking in foreign affairs.

Just today he has tried to cut our nuclear forces by a third. Ironically, both Russia and China are becoming more dangerous with both countries supporting leftist regimes throughout the world. These are the cruel dictators who upend democracy and spread the dissease of communism throughout the world. The utopian vissions lead to economic ruin and brutal tyranny - the very things that we should stand up against. Ironically our President supports Chavez, Castro, and many other socialists/communists.

"The left hammered away at Bush claiming he went into Iraq for the oil! It is ironic how quiet they are now!"

"Ironically, both Russia and China are becoming more dangerous with both countries supporting leftist regimes throughout the world."

I think you need to find a new word other than "Ironic" since it's pretty apparent you don't know what that means.

*sigh*