The U.S. hasn't annexed any territory or demanded profits from the sale of Iraqi oil, we have in fact turned over large amounts of money from the sale of seized Iraqi oil that was smuggled out of the country before the war, so how is this a war for oil?
2007-02-20 03:33:34 · 13 answers · asked by dpanic27 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I see some of you tell me the war WAS going to be financed by the sale of Iraqi oil, but it isn't actually happening. Prior to our invasion of Iraq, their was no talk of lifting sanctions. There was no chance of Iraq selling oil to anyone. So again hao is this a war for oil? America isn't making a penny off of this. And by the way Russia has the world's largest oil deposits.
2007-02-20 03:47:31 · update #1
I agree!!! If America wanted Iraq's oil, all they had to do was make a deal with Saddam to lift the sanctions in exchange for cheap oil. We had bargaining power - we could have had it for a steal!!!
So the argument that the war is for oil profiteering is silly.
Having said that, the fact that the country has a large amount of oil reserves is relevant, in that oil revenues could have been used (and were) by Saddam to finance his expansionist schemes, and it would be disastrous if that resource fell into the hands of terrorists, for the same reason.
2007-02-20 03:56:01 · answer #1 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
i individually sense Bush had various issues on his time table to realize in the IRAQ conflict. First it replaced into to get revenge on Saddam for particularly much killing his father, the 1st George Bush. next, i think of after 9/11, Bush had to confirm a community wherein he ought to combat the terrorist and all might flock to particularly of heading into the US quickly. That way, in case you have been a terrorist, you will possibly bypass to IRAQ particularly individuals place of delivery, cuz' this is much less annoying to attack American hobbies and troops. yet one extra reason replaced into to choose to create like a democratic government there the place this could be the 1st and all Arabic governements there might seem to stick to. Create like a domino impact or some thing. those are the justifications i've got self belief why we are in IRAQ. besides the undeniable fact that, I do think of we would desire to continuously have by no potential invaded IRAQ, i think of shall we've endured containing Saddam like we did and he did no longer even have the chemical weapons we concept he had. this is worst now, back then Bush had a decision, shop Saddam, the devil, or now face with a sparkling devil. The terrorist & Iranians.
2016-10-02 10:56:38 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The U.S. had to establish bases in Iraq for some reason in order to keep an eye on "their" oil. It's like a store sells a brand of popcorn you really love and you don't want anybody else to get any. So you camp outside the store and make trouble so nobody else can go inside. Kind of like that.
2007-02-20 03:40:45 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It didn't turn out the way Bush had "schemed" he wanted to set up a freindly government in an oil rich area-when something start out as lie it usually doesn't go well. We couldn't take advantage of any oil or annex anything as it is-the whole country is out of control.
2007-02-20 03:39:17 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The war plan called for the war against Iraq to be financed by sale of its own oil. Oil is all it was ever about.
2007-02-20 03:37:28 · answer #5 · answered by jxt299 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
We needed to install a puppet government to dictate the future sales of oil so that the dollar doesnt further decline in value.
Regime in Saudi Arabia is unstable, we can't control Iran. Iran is only accepting Euros for dollars. Saddam was going to have his sanctions lifted and would have started selling oil to Russia, Germany and China as opposed to us, ensuring their economies would grow and ours would further decline.
2007-02-20 03:38:46 · answer #6 · answered by Perplexed 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I asked the same question. I was wondering why we are in Iraq if we wanted oil. After all, Saudi Arabia has the worlds largest supply of oil yet we aren't invading them. It doesn't matter if they are our "allies" or not. If Bush is as power hungry as everyone makes him out to be then we should invade them instead.
Liberals are not in touch with reality. They just spew out insults without using actual facts.
2007-02-20 03:41:47 · answer #7 · answered by TRUE PATRIOT 6 · 0⤊ 3⤋
did you know that our gov. invited the taliban for a meeting in texas? we offered the a carpet of gold or a carpet of bombs. $43,000,000 to build a pipeline through afganistan. they didnt take it. now they have a new "president" whats his name? Amed Karzide ( forgive spelling) wait a sec! Unacal had a forien relations suit and tie with the same name. could it be him? sure is but hard to tell now that he traded his armani suits for a sheep skin hat.
2007-02-20 04:09:18 · answer #8 · answered by longshoreman 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They are going to trade oil for Euros as against American dollars which would cripple the American economy.
2007-02-20 03:39:18 · answer #9 · answered by st.abbs 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It is not for oil. Only ignorant idiots think so. The price at the pump can quadruple and these clowns will still think it's for oil...... Bottom line: The masses have the IQ of a banana!
2007-02-20 03:38:26 · answer #10 · answered by Sven B 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋