For 20 years! That's amazing - not just the initial faux outrage and faux grief, but managing to get food to them without tipping the Ba'ath boys off. Bravo!

HE JUST SAID IT WAS ABOUT THE OIL!!! WOLFOWITZ!!! I LOVE IT!!!
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,970331,00.html)

EVERY PROWAR ON THIS BOARD OWES ME AN APOLOGY!! ALONG WITH A FREE GALLON OF GAS FROM EXXON/MOBIL SHELL, GETTY, ET AL!!!'

YA--HOOO! HE SAID IT WAS ABOUT THE OIL! BREAK OUT THE TANNING BUTTER!!! YAA--HOOOOO!!!!!!!

WOLFOWITZ IS THE BEST! HE'S MY FAVOTITE WAR CRIMINAL!! I LOVE HIS COMMITMENT TO SPEAKING THE TRUTH WHEN THE REST OF THE PROWARS BABBLE IN TONGUES!! WE'LL GET THOSE WAR CRIME TRIALS YET FOR THE WHITE HOUSE!!!

YAAAAAAAAA HOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! HE SAID IT WAS ABOUT THE OIL!! FREE CHAMPAGNE FOR EVERYONE!!!! I'M DANCING IN THE AISLES!!!!

YAAA HOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!

Do you really think that someone who managed to single-handedly engineer this whole thing would spill the beans to a German newspaper so easily?
Think again.

After you've realized that you got all excited over nothing, examine your soul to determine why you're so happy about posting such a comment on a story specifically relating just one of the many stories of suffering coming out of Iraq.

Then apologize to whomever you feel is appropriate.

To think that woman saved her childrens lives for 20 yrs is outstanding but I must agree with Phillip why would she come out and make that known to a German Newspaper. Doesn't quite seem logical to me. With all that being said why should we credit her alone? She and her sons weren't the only ones who had it rough. Granted they did have a rough life and if it actually true I applaud her but what do we do about the others? Do we sit and praise this one woman for outstanding job at acting and forget about the rest? I think not!

Roxanne, please don't use my name when you obviously have no idea what you're talking about. I am 100% impressed by this woman and her sons, as comment #1 shows. I hardly think that her effort should be ignored simply because other people also made efforts. I would try to point out a parallel to make that reasoning seem even more ridiculous, but it's already so ridiculous I can't think of one.

My #3 comment was responding to commenter #2 who used this story as a springboard to link to a since-debunked report originally from a German newspaper about Paul Wolfowitz.

So unabashed bravo to the heroic efforts of this woman and her sons, boo to ignorant commenters.

Well, I accidentally posted to the wrong thread, so sorry about that. Although given the U.S.'s own sorry history with Iraq, I don't think it's all that inappropriate.

But as for "discredited," I hardly think so. I've read the full transcript at the Defense Department web site, and it's clear to me what he's saying, if you study his multi-layered remarks carefully, is that access to Middle East oil is the lynchpin of U.S. strategic policy, to ward off hostile regimes that threaten American dominance. A hostile regime, by the way, would include a democratically elected Iraqi government that didn't toe the U.S. line on Israel and that tried to use its oil to challenge the U.S.

It's about the strategic advantage of the oil, my friend, not the supply for our SUVs. Calpundit shyly admits the same thing, several paragraphs down in his post.

As for North Korea: an austere Leninist regime on the verge of collapse, that has no concern for its own people, cannot be sanctioned economically. Like Saddam, the North Korean leadership can easily hoard whatever supplies it wants for itself while giving scraps to its own people.

Back to Iraq: The argument isn't about whether Wolfie "slipped up." If you read Pentagon pronouncements, among the other government press releases that CNN, Fox, and The New York Times (see Judith Miller) publish verbatim as "news," the U.S. is very up front about its intentions, once you get past the OfficialSpeak. Wolfie was just a little more bald than usual. No conspiracy; it's all out in the open.

So I am indeed breaking out the tanning butter.

Did I say "discredited"? No, I didn't. To you I just suggested that you not drool on yourself over nothing. Later I referred to the story as "debunked," which it most definitely was. How can I know this? You've stopped shouting in all-caps and dancing in the aisles and are now saying essentially what the neocons have been saying all along:

Everything is out in the open. There is no conspiracy. Plain words state plain ideas and lead to plain actions.

You may disagree with the words, the ideas or the actions, but to suggest that anybody, anywhere might owe you an apology suggests that you believe that there are beans to be spilled. The truth is, as I've grown immensely bored of saying over and over on threads here at BC, there were many different reasons why we invaded Iraq, and the combination was unique to Iraq. One of them was surely that all else had failed (arguably, of course), and a large part of that was due to Iraq's financial independence. NKorea is much more tied to China and is also financially supported by China, but that bond and support seems to be shaky, so it is possible, especially with the example of Iraq, that the US might be able to apply enough pressure to NKorea to do some good without an invasion.

We can always hope, though crazy loons who run their own countries don't seem to listen to reason much.

Still, I accept your apology for posting to the wrong thread. Thanks for that. The woman and her kids are still heroes, three among many.

Uh-dude, when I said I was owed an apology, I was being, you know, tongue in cheek. As I was with the all-caps thing, although I am sincere in my politics and obviously not a fan of the oily Wolfowitz or the other statist (sorry, "neo") conservatives.

Since I dish it out with the best of them, it would be ridiculous of me to ask for an "apology" from people I attack. So I was just having fun and goading folks, which I'm good at it, as satisfyingly evidenced by the e-mails I get from my travels on the prowar Net, suggesting I go out on tour with the Dixie Chicks and Pearl Jam, with a spoken word introduction by Noam Chomsky, among other hurtfulness hurled at innocent little me. Why can't we all just along?