Iraq question?

Question

If, as it claims, the reason for the US invading Iraq was to 'liberate' the people from Saddam and find the weapons of mass destruction, why is it now pressurising the Iraqi government into handing over control of the oil from state control to US multinationals? Could it be that control of the oil was also a reason for invading?

Answer 1

Isn't it odd that two people who have already answered your question truly believe the U.S.A. should simply "take" Iraq's OIL just because we want it? I wonder how they'll feel when China comes over here and simply "takes" our banks, natural gas, coal, and other resources??
We unconstitutionally, illegally, unjustifiably and immorally attacked another nation for three insane reasons:
1. The Bush family had a personal vendetta against Saddam Hussein ever since the days of Desert Storm when George H.W. Bush was criticized, ridiculed and humiliated for not 'finishing the job' and ousting Hussen at that time;
2. Cheney wants all that OIL swimming underneath Iraq's sands so he and his Exxon-Mobil buddies can get richer and richer and richer feeding America's addiction to cheap easily-accessible foreign OIL;
3. Ever since World War II, the giant U.S. military-industrial complex has recognized how profitable war can be. So all the politicians were bought up, pricey lobbyists were hired and special interest groups were formed to promote and encourage more war. Thus, the U.S. was involved in these illegal 'wars': the Korean Conflict; the Cuban Missile Crisis; the Cold War; Vietnam and Desert Storm, all so that McDonnell-Douglas, Sikorsky, Lockheed-Martin and a host of other government contractors could boost their sagging profits and make billions off the gullible American taxpayers. Two newcomers to the government money trough also needed to make billions: the Carlyle Group and Halliburton, both of whom have direct ties to the Bush-Cheney White House.
Yes, it very well could be that control of the OIL was our real reason for invading another sovereign nation that in no way threatened, provoked or attacked the United States. The other reason was WAR PROFITEERING.
Support our troops? Indeed - 100%!!
But I refuse to support an insane, greedy, corrupt Bush adminsitration that conned our troops - and Americans and Congress - into believing we're there to bring democracy to Iraq or peace to the Middle East.
Peace won't come from war; Dwight Eisenhower warned us that the profit motive would generate more war.
I pity those young conservatives who enthusiastically lead the cheers for more killing, more sacrifice on the part of our troops, and more cost to the American taxpayer. As they grow older, they'll come to realize their cheerleading played a part in continuing this repugnant, ugly chapter in American history - and they'll pay for it with higher taxes and fewer government services. -RKO- 07/13/07

Answer 2

We did not go there for oil. If we really wanted it ~ we'd have just dropped bombs on them until they all gave up. We are truly after the bad guys. And until this is over SUPPORT THE TROOPS ~ EVEN IF YOU DON'T SUPPORT THE WAR!!!

Answer 3

If we wanted control of the oil we could have taken it. I for one think that we should have.
-rj

Answer 4

Dont know, but I'll bet many people are happy that Saddam and his unspeakably cruel sons are DEAD.

Answer 5

You said it all, friend.
Oil and only oil. Nothing else.