English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I believe that the amount we are spending on Iraq would never be repayed by any amount of oil return. I here a lot of people are dying because Bush wants oil. What will he do with this oil? Have you heard of "Oil for Food"?

Maybe it was about oil because Sadaam Hussein was using it to bribe Russia, France, China, etc... in the worst scandal of all time. This is why they won't help and didn't enforce resolutions which left only the US to act.

2006-10-22 04:50:54 · 11 answers · asked by Ben Jammin 2 in Politics & Government Politics

11 answers

We are actually in Iraq because Cheney promised Haliburton billions of $ in work.

2006-10-22 04:54:10 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Its not just about the oil. its about failed leadership and political expediency.

Iraq has nothing to do with the national goal of protecting America. Iraq was not involved in terrorist attacks against the US. Many people, including myself, warned the President that an occupation of Iraq would eventually lead to failure. Bush's political ambitions and willingness to appease war profitters has got us where we are today. Sun Tzu said in 500 BC in "The Art of War" that the needless prosecution of a prolonged conflict would eventually lead to failure.

I do not disagree about eliminating the governments of Iraq and Afghanistan. But attempting to nation build in this area of the world has historically led to failure. We would have been much better off if we would have neutralized the standing governmental structures, entrenched forces to secure the borders of Iraq and Afghanistan from intervention by Iran and Syria, occupied the oil fields and placed oil proceeds into a trust account for the eventual emergent Iraqi government, and then simply informed those countries and the rest of the world that the US will not tolerate threats to its physical or economic survival.

We would have offered post-war assistance to the peoples of Iraq and Afghanistan only if and when requested by them, and would withdraw this assistance at the first hint of violence against US personnel on the ground. Then, working with our international partners, we could have continued to prosecute the war on terror, applying our national power in a positive way supported by the world community. Instead, Bush has conducted a cowboy war which has diminished US prestige around the globe and made the world a much more dangerous place. Foreign policy is not as simplistic as the GOP would lead us to believe...

2006-10-22 11:53:31 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

George bush and his daddies friends stand to make the money from the oil,not a america, most of his political allies are someway or another involved in the oil or logistics business this war has made them rich beyond there imagination.
So to some it up your president is using your tax money to make himself and his buddies rich at the lost of about a hundread young americans a week.
There are countries in the world that are much more of a threat to america but don't have oil so don't get invaded,n korea for example.

2006-10-22 11:59:25 · answer #3 · answered by Jim s 2 · 0 0

The whole matter will end by handing over the Mideast's oil to Iran's control as result of Bush policy.Now the sunnah are driven out of their country by the green card policy and similar policies that serve Iran's interests.The events have proven that Saddam regime was an element of stability for many years and not at all the contrary.Today even those Iraqis who used to oppose Saddam regime are sorrowful for their opposition according to reports in the wide spread Arabic newspapers.

2006-10-22 12:06:10 · answer #4 · answered by kigrawi 3 · 0 0

Yeah, it's clearly more compicated than 'Bush wants oil.' But it's also clear that the reasonsBush gave are simply rationalizations. It is well known that they were planning to attack Iraq from the day they stepped into office.

Basically all the nations involved are looking out for their own self-interest. There are no good guys in this one.

2006-10-22 11:57:20 · answer #5 · answered by MathGuy 3 · 0 0

Have you heard of "oil for war"

Sadaam and bush senior used to be oil buddies thats how he got his palaces.

They had a spat

The us stopped calling him friend when he stopped fighting with iran for them and decided to go for that K country between iraq and the coast.

War is the greatest consumer of oil they make money when the war machine idles its engines.

2006-10-22 12:05:47 · answer #6 · answered by old_brain 5 · 0 0

It isn't just for oil...but that is a big part of it.

By beginning a war against Iraq, Bush and Co. basically guaranteed themselves a 2nd term in office. Raise your hand if you think it's a good idea to change Presidents in the middle of a war after one term.

Halliburton is profiting billions...Just ask Osama Bin Laden.

2006-10-22 12:10:17 · answer #7 · answered by just me 4 · 0 0

We are not there for the oil. We are in Iraq because AIPAC demands it. It doesn't matter who is in charge of any given country in the the middle east they are still going to sell oil on the world market and it will get to the US.

2006-10-22 12:15:02 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The Russians have enormous oil reserves in the north, but no way to get it to market safely. So they planned to build a pipeline from the north sea to the persian gulf. That required subduing Afghanistan. They spent ten miserable years failing that task. As they ran away, we took over, except from the southern end.

2006-10-22 12:05:33 · answer #9 · answered by ssbecak 1 · 0 0

Let me pose a question to you? We can all agree that Hussain is a madman, who wanted to take control of Kuwaits oil.. Picture this if Hussain had control right now of all of the oil in Iraq and all in Kuwait, and perhaps other neighboring countries in that area... what do you think the world would do if this lunatic had control of that much oil? If you people have a brain you need to start using it ...... wake up America.

2006-10-22 12:08:09 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers