Truthout still has this article up — “Oil was the main reason for military action against Iraq, a leading White House hawk has claimed, confirming the worst fears of those opposed to the US-led war.” However, the Guardian has withdrawn the article, perhaps because it was a serious misrepresentation of Wolfowitz’s comments. Not very believable on the face of it, when you think about it, that Wolfowitz would admit we went to war for the oil merely because even if Wolfowitz is among the most craven, he is also among the most crafty in the Bush cabal. It is really only the headline that takes him so seriously out of context; if you read the article, you’ll see he was really drawing an economic contrast between North Korea and Iraq, explaining that because Iraq is ‘swimming in a sea of oil’ we could not hope to use a path of negotiation based on bribing an impoverished nation, as in our attempt to manipulate North Korea. Thus we had no choice with Iraq, in his estimation, but the more belligerent path.