why do you think US has attacked Iraq???

Question

as there were no nuclear weopons found by the UN's commitee, which was the reason given by america, was that actully to capture oil bases in the middle east...

Answer 1

Exxon Mobil, Chevron Texaco, Royal Dutch Shell, BP AMOCO and the traders on the New York Commodity Exchange and the Rotterdam Spot Market wanted to bring Iraq's oil back under their control.

Prior to Saddam Hussein's 1972 nationalization of the Iraq Petrolium Corporation, they owned Iraq's oil fields.

Worse yet, in 2002, Iraq Petrolium Corporation began negotiating with oil companies from France, Russia, China and India to sell them large amounts of oil, and for the sale to be made in Euros, rather than in US dollars.

This would have helped to break the Anglo-American-Dutch monopoly on the global oil trade.. and that just would not do.

The "weapons of mass destruction" stuff was just a cover story to get popular support for the invasion in America and England

The US and British governments already knew that Iraq had WMD's back in the 1980's (because most of them were American or British supplied!) and they also knew that the Iraqi WMD programs were either destroyed by air raids during the Gulf War or dismantled by Saddam Hussein in a failed bid to get the sanctions dropped.

Answer 2

it fairly is humorous in a hack style of way, yet in answer on your question, no. A solid midsection east might have been a extra useful oil procurement coverage because of the fact it would shop danger to the provision strains down, shop hypothesis down, and not fee the US one in all those dramatic quantity of money, time, and political clout. US efforts in Iraq have surely served to destabilize the midsection East regularly, a minimum of in the meanwhile, inflicting the rises in oil expenditures that we've been seeing for a number of years. it fairly is because of the fact the political undertaking is uncertain, the provision strains may well be endangered at any time, and hypothesis, as a effect, went during the roof. The "conflict for oil" prospect would not make lots economic experience, ultimately; the quantity of money positioned into the conflict attempt and the component outcomes it created do not sq. with a source conflict concept. there is one extra rationalization that US leaders have been making use of the conflict in a conspiratorial way, to generate income for their ex-company companions interior the oil industry. That rationalization demands one to bypass to somewhat severe allegations on spurious info. whilst it squares nicely with a traditionally Radical attitude, there is not likely adequate info to help that end very solidly. it fairly is totally probably that there have been motives, or a reason, different than oil income that led to the US to bypass to conflict with Iraq.

Answer 3

WMDS. is what the inspectors were looking for. and yes he had them. saw them with my own eyes. bunkers full of war head capable of droping chemical warheads. it was released in the news a few months back. also some of those missle predate 91 wich means the weapons he was ordered to destroy and the ones we were told were destroyed after destert storm was a lie. he still had them. we also invaded his country cause he was a leader tha promoted terrisim. and would fund any terrist group willing to kill americans. i dont know about u but anyone who wants to kill me because im an american i dont want alive. cause i say kill them before they kill us. the most intreasting that can be said on that is that if they had me a right wing extreamest. and hillery cliton side by side. captured the guys with the swords would cut both our heads off just as quick. cause u see it doesnt matter that the liberals of this country condem the war. or the idiots burn flags and some call the soliders murders. the arab nations would like to do wipe us all offf the planet in there little holy war they declared on the west. and they will stop at nothing until they are done. they will fight down to the last child. there is no stopping them. they will never fully give up or surender. u have to understand to reach the nature of there resolve u must be willing to match them. this country is not willing to go to that extream and until it is we are vunerable to attack. they will get us again on our home soil. and they will continue to do so until the politions take the kid gloves off our military and give them full authortity to take care of this threat. to our familys and way of life. if u read this and dont believe me i propose to you all out there a challange. mostly to you young people. go serve three years in a combat unit on the front line. see how the enemy really lives see whats really going on there not what the news tells you and see the nature of there resolve. then come back here and try telling me im crazy. after u spend 18 months in hell you will sing my tune.

CPL MICHAEL R. JACKSON
US. INFANTRY

Answer 4

For those who are screaming "OIL!" as the reason we invaded Iraq, let me ask you a simple question: if we now have control over all that oil, why is the price of gasoline going up?

The cry of "oil" is the battle cry of the tragically and drastically ignorant sheeple who are just looking for any excuse to blame Bush for something that he didn't do, and who choose instead to belief the liberal crap they see on "loose change" and read in the National Enquirer rather than do some real research and get the facts.

The facts would burst their bubble, so they ignoring them.

Answer 5

It wasn't the real reason but an underlying reason. If you remember the 9/11. The primary reason was going after countries that allow terrorists to train in there countries. Irag was one of those countries. As you noticed Bush didn't go in prior to 9/11 but within a year he went into both countries. The nuclear weopons was an underlying reason. I didn't believe they had nuclear weopons. Even thought they certainly had the knowhow.
As far as I'm concerned Bush just finished a job that should've been done years ago overthrow saddam insane.

Answer 6

The USA never stated that it was attacking due to nuclear weapons. The UN resolutions were the guide for attacking Saddam. Read them and learn. The attacks on US Jets flying in the UN mandated "no Fly zone" was a final straw. The fact that Saddass said he had them was reason enough I think. Oil too was a good reason for attacking as the free flow into the world economy IS a US concern. NO loss there, I would have attacked sooner, GW showed great restraint.

Answer 7

There are many reasons, but only the ignorant will scream oil.

Let's have an excercise in logic, shall we?

1. The reason oil is coveted is for its capital purposes. Bush was an oil man who owned two oil companies. Surely he was aware of how the oil industry worked.

2. The reason we weren't getting oil from Iraq is because of U.S. sanctions. If Bush wanted oil from Iraq, all he had to do was lift sanctions.

3. Attacking the country to seize its oil would lead to higher costing oil production. Saddam used child labor, didn't follow any environmental laws and produced oil for dirt cheap as a result.

4. Bush could not get this oil as cheaply himself as he could from just buying it from Saddam. If his intent was greed then he would've lifted the sanctions instead of starting a war.

I'm sure there were many reasons we attacked Iraq. This, however, was certainly not one of them.

Edit:

Naturally, people thumbs me down for the use of factual information.

Answer 8

Because they wanted to? Best answer to your simple ?
Oh, what is a weopon?

Answer 9

I don't know, why don't you ask all the other DEMOCRATS and Republicans who thought Iraq has WMD. There is past proof that Iraq had WMD and there is reasonable proof they have WMD. I'm tired of this question.

Answer 10

the truth is we may never know the real reason.

one thing we know for certain is that the bush admin and cheney in particular manipulated the intel to try to come up with a predetermined conclusion.

we were lied into a war folks, and something tells me that bush will have an early onset of senility, so will be incapable of articulating the truth in his later years.

we were lied into a war and i say that the party that rubber stamped it and still stand by it are drubbed out of our govt for all times.

we were lied into a war folks, and i say the republicans pay for that error with their very political existence.

i will never vote republican ever again - and i'm not even a registered dem.

but the cons have to PAY for this horrible mistake and their unholy alliance with religious conservatives who want to do away with our beloved constitution...