Thread: What's your opinion on invading Iraq in the first place?

Ninth, et al,

There is little doubt, people had attitude attitude back in 2002 and 2003.

Originally Posted by Ninth

Iraq was a bad idea born out of the "Who's next" attitude that we managed to acquire post 9/11. We went into Afghanistan after Bin Laden, then found the nearest country that objected and gave them a good kicking in the teeth. Afghanistan man have had a moral objective. Iraq was a "Watch what happens world." move pure and simple.

(COMMENT)

But we hurt the US by staying.

Most Respectfully,
R

Originally Posted by dumba

We don't take into account that the things are the other way round in islamic states. We consider their way of life and ruling cruel, but it's normal for them.

No, its cruel. There is increasingly more dissent and protest over such issues in those countries as evidence to the fact.

Originally Posted by dumba

And one more point! How do we know that Saddam's regime is brutal and sadistic? Can you say for sure that the stories CNN or ABC show us are truthful? If you totally believe TV then you didn't see 'Wag the dog' movie. The reality is not the same we watch it on our screens!!!

Mate, Saddam was a (*)(*)(*)(*)ed up sob. There's a reason they called him 'The Butcher of Baghdad.'

I was against both the first and second war.

In my opinion, it was merely a form of "job creation" by elected representatives who have no real solutions to our modern social dilemmas because they can't seem to bear true witness to our own laws, simply and merely due to a lack of a morals test and a drug test, at the same time.

I would agree with this assessment. The Iraq invasion and occupation may also have been- see what the public reaction is so we can do the same to Syria and Iran- more or less what you said in your last sentence.

The U.S. has a significant interest now, by way of the contracts won by Exxon-Mobil to exploit the oil in the southern region of Iraq. 80% of the oil in the south is covered by the contracts with Exxon-Mobil.

Previously, the U.S. oil Corporations were shut out of Iraq, throughout the years from 1973 to 2003.
So they have done quite well out of the mass murdering antics of the U.S. Administration, though not as well as they had hoped for.
The U.S. had hoped to steal most of the oil in Iraq.
It was hoped Iraq would privatise all its oil, and that U.S. Corporations would get all of it, but in the end the Iraqi Parliament is determined Iraq should hold on to its oil, and the contracts mean that any foreign Companies will have to buy the oil from Iraq,in order to be allowed to extract the oil and resell it.
Secondly, the Bush gang hadn't anticipated that Chinese, Russian, and other non-American Companies would win many of the contracts, which is what has happened.
So the U.S. agenda has been foiled, to a very large extent

On the point you raised that the U.S. receives little of its oil from Iraq, you are missing the point, which is that the U.S. oil Corporations sell oil all over the world, and not just in the U.S.A.
The market for oil is global. Americans are not the only people in the world who use oil, and any Corporation which can sell the black gold worldwide (and not just stateside) can get rich on it.
The U.S. stateside market is only part of the story.

I have just replied to your post, but my reply, too long to reproduce here, is on page 3.
I am new to this game of blogging.

I have just replied to yr post, but my reply appears on page 3 ; --near the bottom of page 3.
I am new to this blogging.

Originally Posted by COL TALBOT

The U.S. has a significant interest now, by way of the contracts won by Exxon-Mobil to exploit the oil in the southern region of Iraq. 80% of the oil in the south is covered by the contracts with Exxon-Mobil.

Previously, the U.S. oil Corporations were shut out of Iraq, throughout the years from 1973 to 2003.
So they have done quite well out of the mass murdering antics of the U.S. Administration, though not as well as they had hoped for.
The U.S. had hoped to steal most of the oil in Iraq.
It was hoped Iraq would privatise all its oil, and that U.S. Corporations would get all of it, but in the end the Iraqi Parliament is determined Iraq should hold on to its oil, and the contracts mean that any foreign Companies will have to buy the oil from Iraq,in order to be allowed to extract the oil and resell it.
Secondly, the Bush gang hadn't anticipated that Chinese, Russian, and other non-American Companies would win many of the contracts, which is what has happened.
So the U.S. agenda has been foiled, to a very large extent

On the point you raised that the U.S. receives little of its oil from Iraq, you are missing the point, which is that the U.S. oil Corporations sell oil all over the world, and not just in the U.S.A.
The market for oil is global. Americans are not the only people in the world who use oil, and any Corporation which can sell the black gold worldwide (and not just stateside) can get rich on it.
The U.S. stateside market is only part of the story.

You make it seem like it was crony capitalism in action with our exorbitantly expensive superpower and the Peoples' money.

Originally Posted by COL TALBOT

The U.S. has a significant interest now, by way of the contracts won by Exxon-Mobil to exploit the oil in the southern region of Iraq. 80% of the oil in the south is covered by the contracts with Exxon-Mobil.

Previously, the U.S. oil Corporations were shut out of Iraq, throughout the years from 1973 to 2003.
So they have done quite well out of the mass murdering antics of the U.S. Administration, though not as well as they had hoped for.
The U.S. had hoped to steal most of the oil in Iraq.
It was hoped Iraq would privatise all its oil, and that U.S. Corporations would get all of it, but in the end the Iraqi Parliament is determined Iraq should hold on to its oil, and the contracts mean that any foreign Companies will have to buy the oil from Iraq,in order to be allowed to extract the oil and resell it.
Secondly, the Bush gang hadn't anticipated that Chinese, Russian, and other non-American Companies would win many of the contracts, which is what has happened.
So the U.S. agenda has been foiled, to a very large extent

On the point you raised that the U.S. receives little of its oil from Iraq, you are missing the point, which is that the U.S. oil Corporations sell oil all over the world, and not just in the U.S.A.
The market for oil is global. Americans are not the only people in the world who use oil, and any Corporation which can sell the black gold worldwide (and not just stateside) can get rich on it.
The U.S. stateside market is only part of the story.

Wow. You sure know how to read minds huh? You know exactly the motivations of all these high level people, you must've been in the room with them then huh?

Bush attacked Saddam Hussien out of purely ideological reasons and a way to finally end the decade long brushfire war and no-fly zones once and for all.

Over reach? Absolutely. Mistake? Yes.

But to say that we engaged in that war for petty reasons like oil is ridiculous.

You don't know (*)(*)(*)(*) about what "Bush and his Gang" were thinking. Because I've read all 3 of Bob Woodward's "Bush at War" books and he WAS in the rooms with those people and at no time was any of your wild conspiracy theories mentioned.

Go read some real (*)(*)(*)(*)ing journalism.