The Irrational Exuberance Of The Bush-Bashers

Jonah Goldberg has a great piece this morning on the hullabaloo over Alan Greenspan's comments about our "War for Oil" in Iraq. By now you've heard that what Greenspan meant was not that the Bush Administration went to war for oil, but that Greenspan himself supported the war because he long saw Saddam Hussein as a threat to the oil markets.

That's all well and good, but there's a classic assumption here that isn't being addressed. What's wrong with going to war for oil? "No blood for oil" is the common mantra of the anti-war types, but to them I say, what better reason to go to war? Oil is what keeps America going. It allows me to get to work, to go on trips, to enjoy my life. It gives me the freedom to move about as I wish. Without it, our economy would grind to a halt and we'd never realize our full potential. Oil puts food on the table. What better reason for our soldiers to go to war than to protect our ability to keep the American engine running? This is not a radical position, or at least it shouldn't be.