U.S. at war???

Question

Why did we REALLY go to war with Iraq? I know the trite statement of freeing the people; however, if that were true - why don't we go to war with congo. They are in more dire straights than iraq ever was. Could it be because Iraq has a lot of natural resources the U.S. wants(or at least U.S. people in high places wants)? I know places like congo doesn't have any good natural resources that the U.S. could benefit from. Am I the only one who sees this? Just curious on your thoughts!!!

I do know this, 100 hundred years from now - George W. Bush won't be the great president he thinks he is going to be. He won't be the president everybody says changed the world for the better.

Answer 1

Business Owner, do not mind "sgoldpers...". Regardless of truth and facts, the "sgoldpers...s" will simply keep parroting whatever they were programmed to parrot. 2003 invasion of Iraq is simply April 18, 1775 in North America!

The UN's resolution 1441 is nothing but an attempt to a double standard. The "sgoldpers..." and all hypocrites will never understand that we have arms and nuclear crisis because of the US and Russia (both yet to comply, after more than 30 years, with signed UN's NPT treaties) and Israel? See:

Democracy in America - http://www.cnn.com/specials/2000/democra...

Missiliers - http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000/02/0...

Nuclear Crisis - http://www.gsinstitute.org/archives/0000...

Every nation has the right to self-defense and/or protect its territory! It will be one standard for every nation or none at all!

Answer 2

Only GWB knows for sure. None of the rationalizations given make much sense because they are not the real reasons. All that I can offer is a hypothesis that may or may not contain some element of the truth.

Many contributors cite oil, but I think that is merely a secondary objective. The US could buy Iraq's oil industry for less than the cost of a war. Having fought a war to take over Iraq, the US failed to take the oilfields exclusively for itself.

I think that there is an element of truth in Bush's assertions that the Iraq war is about the 911 attacks, but I do not believe that any part of the 911 attacks originated in Iraq. National borders have little significance in the present conflict because the foe is an ideology not a country. The real strategic threat that Bush is attempting to counter is Islamo-Fascism.

Iraq is a strategically important region in the core of the middle east. Any location in the middle east can be attacked from airbases in Iraq, so any regime developing WMD is at risk. A base in the middle east to disrupt WMD programs is certainly one objective.

The 911 attacks were a provocation and the invasion of Iraq is a counter-provocation. The invasion of Iraq is more cultural than military. The objective is to eliminate or neutralize the culture of hatred espoused by the Islamo-Fascists in Iraq and all of the surrounding countries. The US attempts to liberalize Iraqi society, if successful, would lead to a comprehensive victory for democracy throughout the middle east and an age of peace and prosperity for all. That happy outcome is unlikely, but pursuit of that ideal is a good public relations screen. A more likely response to Bush’s provocation is that the Islamo-Facists will provide JWB with the justification that he needs to wage a full scale Jihad of his own. In the event of a wider war, the US assets (stocks, real estate, etc.) of the Islamic Fascists would be seized and some of Bush's friends would probably be a wee bit richer as a result.

Answer 3

Let me once again re direct your attention to the FACT that this whole damned thing started because we were told that Sadaam had WMDs by the thousands that he was planning of using against US and his neighbors----They had PROOF and Indisputaable evidence of this----
Iraq WAS NOT INVOLVED IN THE ATTACK ON THE U S---this has been disproven fourteen thousand times in at least four hundred different ways--------
This little deal came down because of the Personal Vandetta that the current administration has had from word one against the regime that was there (Sadaam) and the extended war that has come from his removal was predicted by dozens of experts---but none of that mattered to the Bushs'---so---Lies about the WMD (by the way---none were ever even found to have EVER existed-- and No One Ever says ANYTHING AT ALL ABOUT ANYMORE at all---as if all this stuff came as a DIRECT LINK to 9-11---which is a total falsehood )---and isn't it Extremelly interesting that the company in place in Iraq now in charge of damned near everythng is DICK CHANNEY's old homepage Haliburton----AN OIL EXPLORATION AND DEVELOPMENT GIANT------?????

Answer 4

The United States of America is NOT at war. The last time the USA was at war was April 27, 1952, the day before the Treaty of San Francisco took effect, declaring peace between the USA and Japan, and concluding the constitutionally-valid Declaration of War against Japan.

Answer 5

Apparently it is because Iraq has a lot of natural resources !
there is no democracy In Saudi Arabia, Saudi Arabia is dictatorship of the religion((Religions: Muslim 100% )), but Bush doesn't care a straw for this country. Why?!! Because this country is principal supplier of oil in the world!

Apropos Bill Clinton didn't care a straw for Saudi Arabia. It means!!??
When you get down to it there's not much difference between the two!

Answer 6

No oil in the Congo - you are right.

There are many other reasons too, none of which have been stated by the government.
This war is all part of a long term plan by the Illuminati, to take control of the whole world.

Answer 7

Paul O'Neal (member of bush's national security team) says that soon after coming to office the president started plans to invade Iraq and that weapons of mass destruction was just an excuse to get rid of sadam hussein.
. He goes on to say "The country deserves to know -- and the president needs to answer -- why the American people were presented with misleading or manufactured intelligence as to why going to war with Iraq was necessary."..
And on ABC's this week when Rumsfeld was asked about weapons of mass destruction he said "we know where they are".
yet in this video he says "I did not say that".

Answer 8

i believe its the natural resources.its about the money.America use more energy than any other country.and why pay your enemy who supplies most of the world with its oil when you can set him up just to start a war and take it from them.listen to this wont you feel at least a Lil funny about Iraqi men who stop coming to flight school only after learning how to take off and fly.never wanting learn how to land.and why hasn't bin been found but it was so easy for them to get their president.I'm sure a man with his power could have found a cave just like been.and how can you fight to free a country when your country has its own problems.

Answer 9

your right all this garbage we have been told is just a lie, I guess bush and his friends think it is easier to kill our own people and the Iraq's than to hunt for a better way to make a new way to run cars.
He will be known as the president who was impeached.

Answer 10

Are you the only one seeing this? What you live in a cave? Haven't you seen the liberals screaming from the start about no blood for oil and other crap? If you weren't so stupid you could get your head out of your *** and SEE why we went to war. Saddam was in constant violation of the U.N. Resolutions and no one cared or seemed to. I could go on and on about it.