- Daily Photo: Obama Jokes Around at G-20
- Blackwater gets replaced in Iraq
- Daily Photo: U.S. Marines Look Out for Taliban in Afghanistan
- Hillary Clinton the Tomboy and Her "Ah-Ha" Moment
- Obama Administration Sudan Envoy Headed to Region
- Daily Photo: Potential Flashpoint in Iraq
- Clinton Says New Afghanistan-Pakistan Plan Depends on Diplomacy
- Exclusive: Three Israeli Airstrikes Against Sudan
- Additional 4,000 Troops to Be Ordered to Afghanistan
- Daily Photo: Navy Submarine Trains in the Arctic
- Alarm Over North Korea Missile Prep
- Anti-Terror Stimulus? US Offers Rewards for Top Terrorists
- Daily Photo: Pakistani Women in Refugee Camp
- Condoleezza Rice Appears on "The Tonight Show"
- Diplomat and Aid Group Sound the Alarm on Darfur Camp Situation
- auto industry rescue
- Ballotwatch
- Biden, Joe
- Bush, George W.
- Clinton, Bill
- Clinton, Hillary
- Dodd, Chris
- Edwards, John
- Giuliani, Rudy
- Gravel, Mike
- Huckabee, Mike
- Hunter, Duncan
- Inauguration
- Iraq
- Kucinich, Dennis
- McCain, John
- Obama, Barack
- Palin, Sarah
- Paul, Ron
- Romney, Mitt
- Tancredo, Tom
- Thompson, Fred
- Veepstakes
- Vote 2008: Democrats
- Vote 2008: Republicans
- Washington
- White House
« Previous | Main | Next »
McCain Backs Off War-Oil Link
Email
ShareMay 02, 2008 8:48 PM
ABC News’ Bret Hovell reports: Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) stepped away Friday from seeming to suggest earlier in the day that the Iraq War was motivated by U.S. dependence on foreign oil.
At a town hall meeting in Denver Friday morning, McCain was discussing the war in Iraq, and comments about how long the United States will be involved in that region, when he pivoted quickly to energy policy.
“And I just want to promise you this: My friends, I will have an energy policy, that we will be talking about, which will eliminate our dependence on oil from the Middle East,” McCain said. “That will prevent us from having ever to send our young men and women into conflict again in the Middle East.”
After landing in Phoenix later in the day, McCain told reporters that he was not saying that the conflict is about oil.
“We went to Iraq because we believed that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and he was going to use them,” McCain said, reiterating what he has said before on numerous occasions.
He said that he was actually referring to the first Gulf War when he talked about how a new energy policy would allow the Untied States never to have to “send our young men and women into conflict again in the Middle East.”
“I was talking about that we had fought the first Gulf War for several reasons,” McCain said, noting primarily that Iraq had invaded its neighbor Kuwait.
“But also we didn’t want them to have control over the oil, and that part of the world is critical to us because of our dependency on foreign oil. And it’s more important than in any other part of the world.”
But he did not mention the first Gulf War during his town hall meeting in Denver. His comments then came in the context of a conversation about the latest Iraq struggle, and how his plans for Iraq differ from that of his Democratic opponents, who want to begin withdrawing troops quickly from Iraq.
“I believe that that would lead to catastrophe and chaos,” he said of the Democrats’ plans. “And that we would have the whole region, including the country, in such turmoil that we would be required to come back to the region.”
In the very next sentence, McCain said that he wanted to promise Americans that his energy policy would prevent future conflict in the Middle East, as noted above.
In Phoenix, McCain acknowledged how he might have created the impression that oil and the Iraq war were connected, and he sought to correct it.
“I’m sorry if there was a misconception of that. And I hope I cleared that up. … I’m sorry that the word ‘again’ somehow caused an upheaval.”
McCain said that even though he did not vote for war with Iraq because of the vast oil reserves in that region, he does believe that dependency on foreign oil is something that is taken into account.
“I think that if we’re dependent on anything outside the United States of America, it has to, it has to enter into any calculations that we make,” McCain said.
He said that his comments in Denver related only to his desire to be completely independent of foreign oil.
“It’s obvious that we are dependent on oil from the Middle East and that is something that we have to become independent of, because it’s a very unstable part of the world.”
May 2, 2008 in Thompson, Fred | Permalink | User Comments (24)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
So, we invaded Iraq for oil. I guess that also means that we know when we're leaving.
Posted by: Framecrash | May 4, 2008 8:56:21 AM
Everyone voting on May 6, please remember that Hillary's position on Iraq was virtually identical to McCain's. Only Obama spoke out against the war and was absolutely dead on about what would happen, post invasion. He's the only guy running with the forthrightness, wisdom and guts to lead this country. The gas tax holiday, tho trivial, is only the latest example where McCain and Hillary stand together advocating what virtually every economist says is a stupid policy. Obama stands as the lone voice of reason. Hopefully, the American electorate will see through the nonsense and reward Obama for his candor with their votes.
Posted by: Michael | May 4, 2008 9:23:20 AM
I think if Ron Paul would of had a little more air time and got his message out that people would have had a viable candidate. But the brainwashed ignorance of most Americans is sick. They still think that is about Rep and Dems. Wake up ...there is no difference. All three want to finish destroying the constitution. Ron Paul was they only choice but the institution did everything they could to stop a true American ...for what he stood for...Liberty.
Posted by: Amir Rana | May 4, 2008 9:32:03 PM
Oil was of course one of the considerations in the Iraq war. After all it was the Carter Doctrine that stated we would protect our interests in that parts of the world, including military force if necessary. That was because the area is so important to us. Its a statement of U.S. foreign policy and it hasn't changed since Carter.
Posted by: wiz | May 5, 2008 1:54:24 PM
Post a comment
