I am completely amazed at the ignorance of all these answers. Not one has a clue to what is going on. The US doesn't even use the type of oil that Iraq produces. Most European countries do. Sadam was doing a great job running his country, nobody protested in the streets, little to no crime, but little to no freedom or speech either. After all, the people were afraid to say anything. Sadam actually kept the people out of our hair and his own. As far as the UN is concerned, Sadam was really screwing them over to. Bring'em in and send them away. Make them think he has something and denied everything.
Next time know what your talking about before you stick your foot in your mouth. By the way, what's it taste like?
2006-10-02 06:18:21
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Actually the world oil price reached its highest ever level (in real terms) during the Iraq/Iran conflict in the early eighties when supplies were threatened from the whole of the upper Gulf region. It is no use pretending that security of oil supply from the Arabian Gulf is not of major concern to western countries. This does not mean that the conflict is immoral in view of Sadam's record and the trouble he had caused (and might yet have caused) in human terms. Neither has any oil been taken from the Iraqi people who still retain full ownership. However oil does mean, rightly in my view, that instability in that region is taken more seriously than in some other regions of the world in view of its importance to the world economy.
2006-10-02 06:28:16
·
answer #2
·
answered by Robert A 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
People have forgotten that the price of fuel went up sky high in 98 when Clinton was still in office,remember people asking Clinton to hit the reserve oil and he wouldnt do it?Sadam time after time either refused to let the inspectors in or delayed the inspectors long enough to move what he needed to.The same people that are saying we "occupied"Iraq are the same ones that are screaming for us to go into Darfur.Sadam was creating a genecide against his own people..,how many hundreds of thousands of people did our troops find?I guess they would say that if we go into Darfur as well.
2006-10-02 06:26:21
·
answer #3
·
answered by halfbright 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
I can agree that there are probably good reasons for being in Iraq like establishing a democracy, but if not for the biggest manhunt in history, why are you in Afghanistan? I say the main reason there is a war in Iraq is because 911 hadn't happened yet, and George Dubya Bush does not know how to be any other kind of president other than a war-monger. Think about it. What has he done for his own actual country other than start this international man-hunt for Osama? Are Americans any better off since he came into power? I'm not American and don't live in the USA, but I can't think of anything he's done for his country or for the rest of the world for that matter.
2006-10-02 05:59:07
·
answer #4
·
answered by kealey 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
a million. Iraq oil has the biggest "shown" oil reserves and became our volume a million US exporter. 2. With sanctions in position, the US might want to no longer assume Iraq for oil. 3. at present, our 3 proper exporters of oil to the US are Mexico. Canada and Saudi Arabia(it truly is distinctly insecure as elements bypass) it truly is an exceedingly small portion of a record to congress about Iraqi oil: Iraq’s potential oil wealth continues to be usually unrealized. important shown reserves exist, and there are probable better elements searching ahead to discovery. yet oil production has been slow to completely recuperate in the course of the submit-Saddam era, and many hindrances stand contained in the way of accomplishing a reliable export move. besides, refineries are in choose of rehabilitation, necessitating imports of gas and cooking gas interior of Iraq. inspite of those complications, the life of huge elements shows effortless exploitation and rewarding export income that could want to help fund Iraq’s redevelopment. Are we re-construction Iraq or are starting to be those oil wells waiting to bypass? And assisting American businesses upward push up and dealing? no longer to teach the $12 billion despatched over to Iraq in funds by skill of Bremer-ans is lacking. surprisingly, this became usually the money the US Coalition took custody of from the UN Oil for foodstuff "scandal". So, they were corrupt and spending it badly and we made it disappear?
2016-11-25 22:38:59
·
answer #5
·
answered by slaugh 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
So the USA is the lackey of the United Nations or is responsible for enforcing UN edicts? Or just the ones the US agrees with.
Whether Saddam was "doing a good job" and his country doing great and being under his leadership is really, totally none of any other country's business. Under that set of criteria, should Bush be removed? Should Clinton? How about Carter?
We are in Iraq for a number of reasons, and to think oil wasn't part of that equation demonstrates naivete. North Korea has a crackpot dictator, is or is suspected of posessing nukes or WMD, and yet the US does nothing about that issue. And North Korea adds nothing to Asia in general, whereas Iraq under Saddam counter-balanced Iran (remember they were at war for over a decade?) and Christians were not targets of oppression like they are today.
2006-10-02 05:56:27
·
answer #6
·
answered by kingstubborn 6
·
1⤊
3⤋
No, we're in Iraq because in the book of Revelations, it says the glorious endtime will take place in Babylonia (Present day Iraq). We're just speeding up the process.
Quiz time: What priest during the crusades attacked the city of Jerusalem without a plan for breaching the walls of the city? He just expected God to tear the walls down as it was written. Yes, lots of people died.
2006-10-02 06:12:10
·
answer #7
·
answered by tedhyu 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
you clearly have no understanding of that which you speak about. and yes, Saddam was fully co-operating with the UN inspections. for over a decade. are you still convinced they're hiding WMDs over there? you poor sap, you're getting screwed at both ends, and you don't even realize it, even think it's somehow good for you and the rest of the world. do you think invading an OPEC country would DROP the price of oil. go back to school.
2006-10-02 06:13:53
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
More people are dying now than they were under Saddam. I'm sure it wasn't great for his enemies and he wan an undeniable bastard, but it would have been nice to actually have a plan for war instead of just running in willy-nilly and knocking down statues and claiming victory.
And even with the dip in energy prices, gas is still double what it was when Bush took office.
When people say we went in for oil, what they mean is that we went in for the oil companies - and huzzah! They have had record profits for two years straight!
So, I'm not saying it was the reason, but who got rich off this war? You? Probably not. Me? Definitely not. Oil companies? Yup. Halliburton? Yup. Did any CEO's die for it? Nope. How 'bout CEO's kids? Probably not. Poor kids? Yup. My friend's brother? Almost - his convoy got hit.
And who do you think my friend's brother is going to be voting for? In his exact words: "Anyone who isn't Republican."
2006-10-02 05:59:56
·
answer #9
·
answered by WBrian_28 5
·
0⤊
3⤋
The barter is :
US soldiers life and oil barrels!
You can see the oil barrels and no one knows how much is present in that barrel and is it oil or drain water?
God save the mother land!!!!
Saddham was Saddham and is Saddham to his people!
Bush will not get that place in the hearts of Iraqis by blowing off their country. Iraqis are waiting for a retaliation at right time!
2006-10-02 06:37:17
·
answer #10
·
answered by SESHADRI K 6
·
0⤊
2⤋