Oh The Irony!

According to the Associated Press, the United States military is paying upwards of $153 million per month in fuel prices. The article happily avoids the root cause of higher fuel prices...and instead uses the opportunity to *suggest* more war! Whatever happened to Wolfowitz's promise that the war and subsequent reconstruction of Iraq would pay for itself in oil revenue?

There are several darkly comedic points made throughout the article, ranging from shamelessly militaristic to downright bizarre. My favorite part comes near the end, when Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (D-MD) suggests the military pursue alternative sources of energy to power the heavily armored vehicles in Iraq. Anyone else envisioning an Abrams tank with one of those cute little hybrid stickers on it?

I also enjoyed the irony involving the Defense Energy Support Center, an agency that purchases fuel on the open market through "private and government-owned oil companies" for use by the military. The agency then sells the oil to the military at a fixed price, which hovers around market prices on Main Street. Kuwait, one of the few countries in the region selling oil to the US at a discount, is naturally one of the agency's best customers. However, the benefits of lower-priced fuel are not fully realized by the military because the discount is eaten up by "administrative costs and fluctuations in the market."

Predictably, the usual myths surrounding the high price of fuel were mentioned. Between Senator Carl Levin lamenting the Iraqi's "putting tens of billions of dollars in the bank while the US spends tens of billions rebuilding their country" and Rep. Gene Taylor's allusion to Kuwait's disingenuous attitude after being "liberated" by the US, no one should be surprised when our present situation takes a turn for the worse, as some experts suggest.

Of course, the author fails to mention the pink elephant in the room: US military presence in the region. Instead, it is taken as fact that the US military is a necessary commodity to ensure a strong Middle East...whatever that means. That the author fails to even entertain the idea that US military presence is a contributing factor to regional instability--and instead promoting even more intervention as the solution (!)--tells you all you need to know about the arrant war propaganda emanating from our "reputable" news sources.