Doctrines and Visions: Who Is to Run The World, and How?, by Noam Chomsky: "From the point of view of government planners, the ranking of priorities is entirely rational. Terror might kill 1000s of Americans; that much has been clear since the attempt by US-trained jihadis to blow up the World Trade Center in 1993. But that is not very important in comparison with establishing the first secure military bases in a dependent client state at the heart of the world's major energy reserves - 'a stupendous source of strategic power' and an incomparable 'material prize,' as high officials recognized in the 1940s, if not before. Zbigniew Brzezinski writes that 'America's security role in the region' - in plain English, its military dominance - 'gives it indirect but politically critical leverage on the European and Asian economies that are also dependent on energy exports from the region.' As Brzezinski knows well, concern that Europe and Asia might move on an independent course is the core problem of global dominance today, and has been a prime concern for many years. Fifty years ago, the leading planner George Kennan observed that control of the stupendous source of strategic power gives the US 'veto power' over what rivals might do. Thirty years ago, Europe celebrated the Year of Europe, in recognition of its recovery from wartime destruction. Henry Kissinger gave a 'Year of Europe' address, in which he reminded his European underlings that their responsibility is to tend to their 'regional responsibilities' within the 'overall framework of order' managed by the US."

"Why, then, should there be any surprise that terror should be downgraded in favor of the invasion of Iraq? Or that Wolfowitz-Rumsfeld-Cheney and associates were pressuring the intelligence community to come up with some shreds of evidence to justify invasion, Blair and Straw as well: Iraqi links to terror, WMD, anything would do. It is rather striking that as one after another pretext collapses, and the leadership announces a new one, commentary follows dutifully along, always conspicuously avoiding the obvious reason, which is virtually unmentionable. Among Western intellectuals, that is; not in Iraq. US polls in Baghdad found that a large majority assumed that the motive for the invasion was to take control of Iraq's resources and reorganize the Middle East in accord with US interests."

Doctrines and Visions: Who Is to Run The World, and How?, by Noam Chomsky: "From the point of view of government planners, the ranking of priorities is entirely rational. Terror might kill 1000s of Americans; that much has been clear since the attempt by US-trained jihadis to blow up the World Trade Center in 1993. But that is not very important in comparison with establishing the first secure military bases in a dependent client state at the heart of the world's major energy reserves - 'a stupendous source of strategic power' and an incomparable 'material prize,' as high officials recognized in the 1940s, if not before. Zbigniew Brzezinski writes that 'America's security role in the region' - in plain English, its military dominance - 'gives it indirect but politically critical leverage on the European and Asian economies that are also dependent on energy exports from the region.' As Brzezinski knows well, concern that Europe and Asia might move on an independent course is the core problem of global dominance today, and has been a prime concern for many years. Fifty years ago, the leading planner George Kennan observed that control of the stupendous source of strategic power gives the US 'veto power' over what rivals might do. Thirty years ago, Europe celebrated the Year of Europe, in recognition of its recovery from wartime destruction. Henry Kissinger gave a 'Year of Europe' address, in which he reminded his European underlings that their responsibility is to tend to their 'regional responsibilities' within the 'overall framework of order' managed by the US."

"Why, then, should there be any surprise that terror should be downgraded in favor of the invasion of Iraq? Or that Wolfowitz-Rumsfeld-Cheney and associates were pressuring the intelligence community to come up with some shreds of evidence to justify invasion, Blair and Straw as well: Iraqi links to terror, WMD, anything would do. It is rather striking that as one after another pretext collapses, and the leadership announces a new one, commentary follows dutifully along, always conspicuously avoiding the obvious reason, which is virtually unmentionable. Among Western intellectuals, that is; not in Iraq. US polls in Baghdad found that a large majority assumed that the motive for the invasion was to take control of Iraq's resources and reorganize the Middle East in accord with US interests."