If you look at the neocon writings prior to 9/11 - the main reasons are two;
1. Securing the oil supply.
2. Protecting Israel.
He's half right.Do you agree with Mr. Putin that the invasion of Iraq was an attempt to secure control of oil reserves?
The attack on Iraq was a con by Israel to smash an enemy of Israel, oil was just a carrot to persuade Bush to use American money and lives to do this
Oil is a fungible commodity, which means it is all one global market. Iraq is chump change in the oil market. We have enough oil reserves within our borders to last us quite a long time.
Putin is probably the world’s most dangerous man and also one of the least stable. Someone needs to stand up and smack that little man upside the head.
It's all about the oil.
President Bush said that the reason for invading Iraq was because he believed that Saddam Hussein was hiding WMD, %26amp; he was planning on using them against the United States. That turned out to be false. But we can't let the Iranians get control over the Shia majority in Iraq. We should stay there until the end of the Bush presidency. We should try to make sure that Iraq has a stable government before we leave.
Remember when Bush looked into Putin's eyes saw that he was a ';good man';. I think that was because he saw a mirror image. So when Putin says the US is in Iraq for the oil, he's correct, but he's also projecting his own geopolitics on the Bush and the US. It's likely that Putin has a personal as well as a political interest in the oil and gas from the Caspian basin. Stupid US neocons aren't playing this game very well at all.
I read the article on the missile defense shield issue. One thing I don't hear in the US is debate on whether Bush's shield against Iran is needed or whether these weapons work. Aren't they the star wars weapons of the Reagan era? Also, I don't see much mention of the fact that Russia has been helping Iran with nuclear technology,and that Bush's posturing on both the Iranian nuclear issue and the missiles in Europe are clearly helping to re-start the cold war.
In Bush's own words
''If Zarqawi and [Osama] bin Laden gain control of Iraq, they would create a new training ground for future terrorist attacks,'; Bush said. ''They'd seize oil fields to fund their ambitions. They could recruit more terrorists by claiming a historic victory over the United States and our coalition.';
Edit
That hasn't happened.
Getting control of the oil reserves was the only reason that ever made sense to me, so I use to believe that. If we controlled Iraqi oil we could break the OPEC cartel and protect our oil supply from disruption in case of trouble in other oil producing states. I sat in the gas lines in 1973 so it seemed like a rational but immoral foreign policy objective to me. In addition the only WMD we had any real evidence that Iraq had was poison gas , which never seemed a sufficient cause for the war. But after watching what has happened in Iraq since the invasion I no longer think our policy was rational, so I don't really believe it anymore.
';Iraq doesn't even have that much oil. We went to Iraq based on circumstantial evidence which turned out to be faulty.';
LOL. That answer gave a good laugh. Iraq still has a large oil reserve. The second largest KNOWN oil reserve after Saudi Arabia. Oil exploration is expensive, risky and dangerous. You can't just go out there and at some point say ';ah ha! found it!';.
You see, the thing is that Iraq was weak, that is why Bush and his henchmen went there. Sure, Canada has a lot of oil reserves, and the reason why US is not treating Canada the same as Iraq is because it is a vital trade partner. Invading Canada ';Iraq style'; would be national suicide for the US.
I know that neocons are evil and stupid, but not that stupid as far as I know.
Russia is not the same as Iraq. And yes, Russia has many natural resources including oil. I think that Putin is unhappy about the fact that Bush and his administration blocked Russia's entry into the WTO.
The US has too much influence in too many affairs, even in the ';World trade organization';. Maybe it should be named the ';American trade organization'; (snicker snicker).
I know that Russia is not as economically strong as the US and certainly is no angel (nobody is 100% perfect), but I will show my support for whatever Russia believes in for the sake of world peace and prosperity.
And the US economy is fragile and has been fluctuating quite a bit over the years.
Me lost faith in US politicians (hypocrites).
Absolutely.
The Iraq war is all about Oil.
He's merely reiterating what former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan had stated a few weeks ago. Taking over and securing oil reserves was a major underlying motive for invading Iraq, though not the sole motive. The fake Downing Street Memo regarding ';yellow-cake'; and a personal vendetta on Bush's part were at play as well.
Plans to invade Iraq were drawn up long before 9-11-01 so the premise of using terrorism as a rationale to forcibly invade and occupy Iraq is a false one.
Russia, Germany, France, and a considerable number of informed Americans and Brits have known this all along.
In fact, yes. This Iraqi invasion and occupation has to do with the privatization of its oil reserves.
Sure. Google ';Tibet oil'; to see why Bush was so concerned about human rights there.
Of course Bush went there for the oil. Him and Cheney are now multi-multi-millionaires. It's the oil stupid!
You are just hearing this now? You do not need to go outside the US to hear this. I have been saying it since before the first tank rolled into Iraq.
One of the biggest arguments against this is that America does not get a lot of oil from Iraq. The flaw in that argument is exposed in the way you worded that question. It is not about getting more oil to America. It is about gaining CONTROL of oil reserves for American OIL COMPANIES.
What are the other possible reasons?
1) Revenge for 9/11? Bush himself admits that Sadaam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11.
2) WMDs? Bush kicked the UN inspectors out of Iraq because they were proving there were none. Better to send in 150,000 soldiers than 150,000 more inspectors, right?
3) Sadaam Hussein was a bad person. Worse than Usama bin Laden? Apparently bin Laden was not important enough to capture at Tora Bora because the troops were more urgently needed to save the Iraquis from enduring one more month of misrule. And now they are so much better off!
4) The Middle-East needs an example of a democracy? Turkey is not good enough, so why not Iraq?
The idea of a democratic Iraq is incredibly stupid. Given a representative six inhabitants of Iraq, there will be approximately four Shi’ites, one Kurd, and one Sunni. For historical and cultural reasons, that Sunni is now being hounded and hunted to death by the other five inhabitants and would always lose a democratic election. The Shi’ites, who would win every such election, now have de facto independence in an oil-rich region, “Shiastan”. The Kurds, who are not Arabs and who would always lose such an election, naturally want and actually have de facto independence in an oil-rich region, “Kurdistan”. Thus, because of ethnic and religious conflicts, Iraq is politically unstable and is not a viable nation. To end the war, Iraq must be partitioned into three totally independent and stable nations. Actually, that partition is occurring naturally despite Bush’s attempt to prevent it. Without a US presence, the Shi’ites would drive the Sunnis into their oil-poor desert, “Sunnistan”. And Bush’s “surge” to allow reconciliation is a bloody hoax: the Shi’ites have no reason to give one shekel of oil revenue to the Sunnis.
And none of the three new nations will be democratic, either.
I can't think of another reason. I guess it must be the oil.
Far from it and with his strange meetings with Iran and other terrorist sources besides the return to KGB control of the media I don't see a reason to follow the requests of Chairman Putin.
Putin is SOOO LATE! People have been saying that since the war began.
I don't believe a thing that comes out of Putin's mouth. He's a liar and a tyrant and a murderer. To accept what he says requires a ';willing suspension of disbelief';.
Yes I agree! History will also
that was part of it
No doubt in my mind they went there for the oil. Without the oil our economy would stop completely.
Putin has been sticking his nose into all kinds of crap lately acting like hes a real tough guy with that karate outfit on. Maybe hes just taking a break from killing russian journalists.
He's just stating the obvious.
Only the 23% percenters in this country can't see this...
He sounds just like Democrats here.
';Imagination does not count as FACT.';
Putin sounds like an American Democrat.
No surprise there.
No, if it was that then Saudi would have been invaded as well as several other nations. Putin just wants to stir up the cold war again.
Iraq doesn't even have that much oil. We went to Iraq based on circumstantial evidence which turned out to be faulty.
No I don't, this man is in the middle of his own agenda and will provide support from his country by picking out any topic to slap America. Quite frankly he is doing the same thing our own candidates are currently doing in the run for the White House.
No, because we don't need the oil that bad and Putins a nutjob.
Gee, where is all of the free oil you democrats keep talking about? It cost me $48 bucks to fill my gas tank yesterday.
Could the war be that we wanted to go and kick some butt over the whole 9/11 issue?
No comments:
Post a Comment