The other night when John Edwards mentioned Halliburton and the Cheney record on sanctions, the Veep explained that he had done so in an effort “to try to confuse the voters.”
Actually, there’s really nothing that confusing about the Cheney record on Iran and its relationship to his gig at the big H.
In 2002, Cheney explained that: “The government of Iran is the world’s leading exporter of terror.”
Just a couple of years before that, Cheney was against sanctions on Iran because American companies (or make that company) were being “cut out of the action.” Cheney added: “We seem to be sanction-happy as a government. The problem is that the good Lord didn’t see fit to always put oil and gas resources where there are democratic governments.”
Now GOP true believers will argue two things. One, that was then, this is now, and the world has changed since 9-11. And two, that Cheney was against unilateral sanctions because they weren’t that effective anyway.
The new world line of thinking doesn’t hold water (or oil for that matter). Why? Well, Halliburton did about $65 million in business with Iran during the very much post 9-11 and current axis of evil time period known as last year.
The unilateral argument is laughable. First, this administration is bow-legged with glee over their unilateralistic tendencies. Second, Bush and Co have governed according to a moralistic foreign policy. We will root out and kill the bad guys. There are no gray areas. We will not do business with the evil doers. Who cares if the French follow our lead?
Taking all of these factors into account, is there anything really confusing about why Cheney wanted the sanctions lifted?
There are indeed no gray areas, only green ones.
… And they loaded up the truck and they moved to Washington, D.C. that is…