Of course it's about oil... oil means money.. money means control... ultimate goal is control..
Mackenzie.. do some real research.. you've tried to sound educated.. but you have no idea what you are talking about...
2007-07-04 18:44:45
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Wassup...is:
"Australia says securing oil supply means no Iraq withdrawal"
CANBERRA (Thomson Financial) - Australia admitted for the first time on Thursday that securing oil supply is a key factor behind its involvement in the United States-led war in Iraq.
Defence Minister Brendan Nelson said a review of Australia's defence strategy to be released Thursday concluded that maintaining 'resource security' in the Middle East was a priority.
http://www.forbes.com/business/feeds/afx/2007/07/04/afx3884716.html
----------------------------------
Good, now we've got someone talking.
2007-07-05 01:17:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Over 80% of Iraqi oil exports are under contract to Compagnie Petrol De Francais. That's a French petroleum company. France has no troops in the Iraqi theater of operations. Someone needs to purchase a map for Minister Nelson.
2007-07-05 01:15:09
·
answer #3
·
answered by desertviking_00 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
What? The Iraq war/occupation is about...gasp...oil? Perish forbid! How can this be? Everyone knows that Cheney's secret meetings with the the Oil Mafia dons just prior to the invasion was about why we didn't need middle east oil and why we shouldn't attempt to control who gets it and how much. Ask George Bush...he'll tell you that oil had no part in this invasion...Ask Cheney..he'll tell you the same thing. Of course they would!
2007-07-05 01:26:22
·
answer #4
·
answered by Noah H 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Agree
2007-07-05 01:14:26
·
answer #5
·
answered by kassandra 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
Why wouldn't it be? However, it is obvious nonsense to say: "IT was about OIL".
That's like saying you go to work for a paycheck. Period.
It might also have had something to do with the facts that:
Saddam attacked one of our allies (Kuwait);
Paid suicide bombers to attack women and children in another of our allies (Israel);
Tried to assassinate one of our Presidents (WHO CARES if it was President Bush's father. IT WAS ONE OF OUR PRESIDENTS!);
Bragged up to within a month of the beginning of President Bush's attack on him that he still had WMDs and was still making them and was fooling the U.N. and U.S. He bragged this to his allies and they found the proof of that;
Use WMDs in the past, and evidence of his attempts were found;
Attacked us repeatedly during the ten year cease-fire;
There's more, but I'm boring anyone who was paying attention the last decade or two.
By the way, when did it become our responsibility to ignore our national interests to please the socialists in our midst? They attacked our national interests as well. Several countries have but we don't attack them. We even chased our allies out of the Suez Canal area against our national interests, as well as helping nationalize the Panama Canal.
We don't attack those that don't attack us or our allies.
Yes, oil was a factor. It's stupid to pretend it was the only one. It's seditious to try to convince others when you KNOW it wasn't the only one.
2007-07-05 01:20:59
·
answer #6
·
answered by mckenziecalhoun 7
·
0⤊
3⤋
Consider the source
2007-07-05 01:13:26
·
answer #7
·
answered by lobo 4
·
1⤊
2⤋