Mmm, can't agree. As I heard it, he didn't pretend to know that, he hedged about it, said "maybe" it was so at a strategic level, and if so, that was OK. But at a tactical level, he was emphatic that it isn't about oil.
I had to go back and look again...
The one thing that really chaps me more than anything else is that, "We're over there for oil," and it chaps me to no end because, if you were there, you would see that oil really -- at least at the tactical level -- now, strategic and operation, maybe -- not operation, but strategic, maybe, and you know what, that's fine. That's fine by me. But at the level that I'm at, this is the farrest [sic] thing from oil.
I don't know...It looks to me that he's convinced the gov't went in for the oil...And the military strategy has the oil in their sights...But at his level no one's thinking about oil...Maybe I'm wrong, but that's what I see...Unfortunately, his oil remark may not play too well in the liberal media...