Well, so much for finding a pony in there somewhere with Allie G:

Greenspan, who wrote in his memoir that “the Iraq War is largely about oil,” said in a Washington Post interview that while securing global oil supplies was “not the administration’s motive,” he had presented the White House before the 2003 invasion with the case for why removing the then-Iraqi leader was important for the global economy.

“I was not saying that that’s the administration’s motive,” Greenspan said in the interview conducted on Saturday. “I’m just saying that if somebody asked me, ’Are we fortunate in taking out Saddam?’ I would say it was essential.”

Let’s hear it for the power of the human subconscious, which enabled Bush to invade a country without any awareness of his mission’s main purpose!

It was essential to steal the oil from a sovereign nation. It wasn’t, however, essential to make large and urgent investments in renewable energy. What good would it do us to develop a lucrative new industry, save the environment, and reduce our reliance on Middle East oil? None at all, you dirty hippie dumbass.

Thank God it was Greenspan protecting the long-term strength of the dollar:

Meanwhile, a German magazine reported that Greenspan said it is possible that the euro could replace the U.S. dollar as the reserve currency of choice.

According to an advance copy of an interview to be published in Thursday’s edition of Stern, Greenspan said that the dollar is still slightly ahead in its use as a reserve currency, but added that “it doesn’t have all that much of an advantage” anymore.