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

After invasion of Iraq the only thing american troops did was protecting oil wells and its ministry.

2006-11-30 07:40:06 · 23 answers · asked by Dollar! 1 in Politics & Government Military

At the beginning of the war when america invaded baghdad, chaos was established, people killing eachother, property stolen, and the only thing americans done was protect oil and related properties.

2006-12-02 14:52:36 · update #1

23 answers

Yes. Period.
Why don't we attack North Korea? Because they don't have it? Why don't we overthrow Kuwait's emir, and install democracy? because they have oil.

2006-11-30 08:32:55 · answer #1 · answered by Signore F 2 · 1 1

we are battling a conflict in Iraq to really remedy a difficulty left through England 40 years in the past. The benefit is, traditionally democracies enter into wars of aggression a lot less usually than Dictatorships. (note, we are no longer the aggressors in Iraq, Iraq we are no longer there to make Iraq the 51st state) meaning warring between 2 democratic governments is few and far between. Hind sight is 20 20, i'm constructive he regrets something, despite the indisputable fact that it would want to easily be the execution. i might want to eliminate the guns. safe practices is the first roll of the federal authorities. What occurred when we pulled out of vietnam? Watch a video on it. It just about made me cry, moms were handing there little ones to troops leaving the city. Thank how solid a moms bond is.

2016-10-08 00:39:16 · answer #2 · answered by hemmingway 4 · 0 0

No, we are not fighting in Iraq for oil. The oil industry is Iraq's largest source of foreign income. Your characterization that that is the only thing that our troops did after invading is false. Obviously, it was important to protect these assets for the long-term good of the Iraqi citizens. It makes little difference where Iraqi oil is sold in the same sense that it makes little difference when the electricity you are using to read this is generated. So long as it is there, it is there.

2006-11-30 07:52:42 · answer #3 · answered by Flyboy 6 · 4 1

If that's so, America is doing a lousy job of it.

1. Even if we wanted to do this, it would take billions to upgrade the oil equipment in Iraq;

2. If Americans protects oil wells, we're doing it for greed; if we don't protect them, we're negligent and are responsible when jihadists set them on fire.

Can this military do anything right for you libs?

2006-11-30 07:46:34 · answer #4 · answered by C = JD 5 · 5 0

I think definitely yes, but it would be wrong to assume that is the only reason. There are are many reasons USA is involved in Iraq. I believe stability in the region is another, unfortunately there was a very good reason Bush senior kept Saddam in power, because they knew exactly what is happening now would happen if he was overthrown. His son just did not want to listen. Goes to prove, father knows best.

2006-11-30 08:24:37 · answer #5 · answered by rmrndrs 4 · 1 1

We know that the first thing Saddam did when he found he was losing the war during Desert Storm was to set the Iraqi oil wells afire, and Americans had to put them out at great personal risk.

Iraq is not one of America's main sources of oil, in fact France takes much of it for sale in Europe. America's primary source is Canada.

2006-11-30 07:46:25 · answer #6 · answered by senior citizen 5 · 7 1

They call it the War on Terrorism for a reason....the war for oil would just sound stupid!

2006-11-30 08:38:07 · answer #7 · answered by Starry Eyes 5 · 3 0

Oh, yes, most definitely!

I mean, if you can steal it, why pay for it, right?

It's an unreported scandal of the first order that each and every day of the year the US has hundreds of tankers backed up all the way to Oman waiting to take on stolen Iraqi crude.

These tankers are contracted for by the Navy (Halliburton leases the ships from private owners (mostly from Greece) and re-leases them to the Navy) and, once the oil is loaded, it is taken to Aruba, where it is transferred to tankers owned / leased by America's leading oil companies. They then process the stolen crude through their refineries and keep all the proceeds as pure profit!

I've written to every member of Congress and all of the major media outlets and so far no one has seen fit to reply; as I said, it is a major scandal of the first order and no one is paying attention or will talk about it!

2006-11-30 07:50:50 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 5

No. If that were the case, our oil prices would drop rather than edge consistently higher. Use a little logic.

2006-11-30 08:45:21 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

Oil is a big factor in it. But there are other reasons as well. Iraq is located in a region of the world that is very rich in natural resources. The middle east is really the crossroads of civilizations. Europe, Africa and Asia are all bordering this region. Trade routes alone would make Iraq a vital area to control for a power bent on establishing itself as a world power.

So not only do you have oil, you have control of ground trade between Asia, Europe and Africa. This is why we have no intentin of leaving Iraq anytime soon. We want to keep that area under our influence.

2006-11-30 07:43:22 · answer #10 · answered by sscam2001 3 · 2 7

fedest.com, questions and answers