the us will just have to accept loosing thier oil wells in iran one day
2007-02-20 13:55:43 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
the guy is finally coming to his senses
2007-02-20 14:20:19 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
1. Blair is not withdrawing troops. There was a condition that conditions had to allow it.
2. The British have just concluded an apparently successful campaign to snuff out official corruption and militias in their area which, if it holds, makes their troops staying silly.
3. France and Russia "own" the oil in Iraq. The US uses precious little Middle East oil. Getting rid of Sadem was aimed at preventing a disruption of the WORLD economy by blackmail and as a start in a long term fix of the radical Islam problem.
Good catch, "Fast Eddy" - I assume he actually meant Iraq, though. Of course, I may be giving too much credit.
2007-02-20 14:07:57 · answer #2 · answered by Caninelegion 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is just troop re-deployment dressed up as something good. Notice the timetable: it is very slow and drip drip. If he was taking a strong withdrawal stance, then he would get them out over a month or two, not drip drip all the way through 2008. It is just about prep for Iran.
2007-02-20 20:41:21 · answer #3 · answered by Bob M 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Very simply Mission Accomplished. In much of the south of Iraq there is peace and law & order, a coalition force is no longer appropriate. As pointed out only 50 per cent of the UK force is currently to be withdrawn.
In all likelyhood this will mean that more troops are available to go to Afghanistan. Hopefully they will be better equiped than our current under resorced contingent.
2007-02-20 15:35:30 · answer #4 · answered by pwei34 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I certainly hope not. It will be the start of WW3 if Bush attacks Iran and China has said they will back Iran. Who wants to take China on with their massive military forces?
2007-02-20 14:09:02 · answer #5 · answered by Fatcat 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I dont' think the UK really wanted to be over there that much and now, it has been so many years with little to no change it seams, why use the manpower over there and have people killed in a war that you didn't support. I know my mum was telling me that the UK and Australia didn't really want to go war, but as the US did, they did want to support the US, maybe they are just tired of it now. Who knows, maybe it is because Prince Harry was to be posted over there with his unit latter this year.
2007-02-20 14:01:24 · answer #6 · answered by CelticLady01 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Blair is finally just doing the smart thing. His people in his country do not agree with Bush's war either. In the US the government is ignoring their people... they just don't seem to care.
2007-02-20 14:07:59 · answer #7 · answered by Debra H 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The U.S. has oil wells in Iran? Just where in Iran do you think these oil wells are located?
2007-02-20 14:07:09 · answer #8 · answered by Fast Eddie B 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Read the story. Not all of the troops are leaving. There are over 7000 that are remaining. They are barely touching half.
2007-02-20 14:00:00 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes.American intervention in Iran is imminent.No body left in Iraq to be killed.Bush has to find out a newmarket for American arm manufacturers to flourish.If somebody has got some benefit out of US interventions it is only arms manufatrurers in USA.
2007-02-20 19:50:48 · answer #10 · answered by leowin1948 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I think he is right for doing so... He is smart enough to know its time to do that and that there is nothing to be gained by this war... God Bless You Tony Blair...
2007-02-20 14:01:12 · answer #11 · answered by karen_03625 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋