Why do people keep saying the War in Iraq is for oil/halliburton/cheney&co?

Question

I dont know the exact amount we've spent so far but i would say its 500+ billion.......

why would bush admin spend all that plus more to come of tax payers money just so private companies can make a few billion a year or whatever they make? doesnt make sense.

and what about this for oil reason? gas prices is has been high 2's low 3's for years. if its really for oil shouldnt we be enjoying cheap gas? i dont get it someone explain please.

Answer 1

surlygurl:

>>"If it's not for oil, what would you propose it's for?"

-- You are conveniently forgetting years upon years of inneffective UN sanctions imposed on Iraq by the international community. You are also conveniently forgetting UN weapons inspectors (not U.S. inspectors) cataloguing thousands of pounds of weaponized chemical weapons and the use of those weapon on Kurdish civilian population centers - although those weapons are unaccounted for, they were there and they were used (this was not a figment of the Bush administration by any means). You are also forgetting that Iraq was continuously violating the peace agreement that ended the first war by attacking the Kurds and firing on coalition aircraft on an almost daily basis.

Here's a little common sense: The war in Iraq is costing the U.S. more money and resources than the unrefined oil in Iraq could pay back in many, many, years - longer than we will have troops there. Any economist that isn't blinded by politics could point out how silly it is to say the war was only about oil.


>>"There are dictators in countries around the world that the >>US didn't see fit to overthrow (Zimbabwe, Sudan, >>Ethiopia, etc.) or in other ways take over the country on >>behalf of the oppressed citizenry."

-- So you are saying the U.S. should launch an attack on Zimbabwe, Sudan, and Ethiopia? I really do not see the logic of your statement at all. Why do you think the U.S. should use military force on those countries, please explain further?


>>"Terrorist threats have increased, not decreased, following >>the US occupation, so if it is truly an ideological "war on >>terror" (knowingly based on false information about a >>nonexistant threat from Iraq), it has proved to be >>ineffective."

-- So how many times has the U.S. been attacked since the war in Iraq started? Unless I'm missing something, it seems a lot of AQ and mujahadin are dying in Iraq to our soldiers and it's no coincidence that there have been no further attacks against U.S. civilians. What increase of terrorist threat are you citing? Any supporting evidence/studies?

Besides the obvious lack of any further attacks, no one in the Bush administration claimed that we were going into Iraq after AQ or as a part of the war on terror. To see the real reasons, research all the U.N. sanctions and the reasons why the U.N. felt the need to place them into effect - those are the same reasons stated by the Bush administration.

The war in Iraq HAS TURNED INTO a fight against AQ and foreign mujahadin fighters. Regardless of your personal opinion or political views that is the case now and it has been effective in killing a lot of terrorists that otherwise would have been planning or conducting attacks against civilian targets in the western world.




>>"Oil is the reason for US intervention, but not cheap oil >>prices for the public, obviously! The beneficiaries of this >>war are those companies you mentioned who make >>money you wouldn't believe on their war contracts. Bush >>and his friends are all members of this corporate world >>that have no problem using the taxpayers' money to enrich >>themselves. It is not in their interest to provide cheap gas >>to consumers, even if it is available. That clearly can't be >>the reason for the war, since the cost has only increased."

-- That whole statement is nothing more than political dogma. If you really want to go down the road of saying that it was a conspiracy by empowered corporate evil men: Don't forget that giving the U.S. 'free' oil from Iraq would effectively destroy or weaken Bush's interests in oil which is domestically produced from the Gulf of Mexico oil fields. It doesn't make sense in any case for Bush and his 'friends' to want to ruin their own interests here.




>>"Note: When making accusations of ignorance, get the >>facts right! Did Saddam Hussein attack the US on its own >>soil? No, wait, that was done by a Saudi, who belongs to a >>family that is VERY GOOD friends with Bush and pretty >>much working for the same goal, which is control of middle >>east oil."

-- This is where you are completely wrong and once again citing political dogma. Bin Ladin is from Saudi Arabia - where he was exiled from back before the war in Afghanistan with the Soviets. The reason he was exiled from Sudi Arabia is because his primary goal in life is to get rid of the House of Saud (the royal ruling family) and replace it with an Islamic fundamentalist government that follows Sharia law. Bin Ladin has been an enemy of the government of Saudi Arabia since way before you were born probably. It is in the interest of both the U.S. and the Saudi Government to work together against AQ. AQ has attacked both governments - it's as simple as that. Also, blaming Bin Ladin's family for his actions makes as much sense as me blaming you for a distant relative that many years ago might have fought Native Americans. Bin Ladin's family disowned him for his actions and beliefs a long time ago as well. WAY prior to 9/11. Bin Ladin's family does not share his views. You are repeating an empty half-truth - research it yourself instead of regurgitating the same old convenient, politically motivated, half-truth.

If anyone is being ignorant here, it is you. Almost all of your statements are empty. Stop repeating mindless dribble that you read on the internet or in politically motivated books and learn to think for yourself. Keep an open mind and worry less about your political party or trying to keep the hippie dream alive. Iraq is not Vietnam, Iraq is a real place and volunteers are sacrificing their lives fighting there against AQ and foreign mujahadin for you. You might want to appreciate that a little more and worry less about politics.

Answer 2

The Bush plan is to invade Iraq (illegally) because of it's natural resources(oil) and maintain a presence in the region to control the distribution of the resources. Also, the Bush adiministration awarded the contract for reconstruction to Haliburton and it's subsidiary and offshoot companies who are doing very little and charging the taxpayers a fortune...literally. Notice that the contract was AWARDED not bid upon and secured by the most competent low-bidder. Gas prices stay higher than they should be for a few reasons. One reason is that there are now only 6 large oil co.'s when there where about 15 or so 10 years ago. The administration favors big business to the point where big business is actually drafting legislation. I'm not sure you realize how much a few "billion" is really worth. Also, I think erehwon must have been sleeping inside a soda can for the last 6 years.

Answer 3

HAHA The responses by the people here are so BIASED and off track haha...

I am not saying that it is true, however for all you ignoant people heres how it works...

Bush/congress cut taxes, in reality helping them ALOT... the main focus when making money s beating taxation an inflation.... So lets say he pays 30,000 a year in Taxes... By having other millions tied up in stocks and such for these companies they will get a larger return on there money than the 400,000 they get from the GOV't. Relize, they just made a ton of money.

Also, of note things like gifts(Large million dollar + gifts to cheney and D congressman form LA) helps spread that type of corruption...

Plus, I am a financial analyst, my job is to tell you guys the facts... I am not saying its right or wrong but thats how it would happen if ALL the other media besides FOX, and some editorials were right...

haha werent you people told when you are young that if 565463 people say something but 4 say the opposite that those 4 are crazy? haha Whatevs I am done

Answer 4

If it's not for oil, what would you propose it's for? There are dictators in countries around the world that the US didn't see fit to overthrow (Zimbabwe, Sudan, Ethiopia, etc.) or in other ways take over the country on behalf of the oppressed citizenry. Terrorist threats have increased, not decreased, following the US occupation, so if it is truly an ideological "war on terror" (knowingly based on false information about a nonexistant threat from Iraq), it has proved to be ineffective.

Oil is the reason for US intervention, but not cheap oil prices for the public, obviously! The beneficiaries of this war are those companies you mentioned who make money you wouldn't believe on their war contracts. Bush and his friends are all members of this corporate world that have no problem using the taxpayers' money to enrich themselves. It is not in their interest to provide cheap gas to consumers, even if it is available. That clearly can't be the reason for the war, since the cost has only increased.

A useful book to read about these things is "Armed Madhouse" by Greg Palast.

Note: When making accusations of ignorance, get the facts right! Did Saddam Hussein attack the US on its own soil? No, wait, that was done by a Saudi, who belongs to a family that is VERY GOOD friends with Bush and pretty much working for the same goal, which is control of middle east oil.

Answer 5

Because its Republican in office. maybe it just a form of entertainment for liberals i don't know really?

I mean people die and now 9/11 is a conspiracy and you would think if bush could pull that off we would have probably found weapons of mass destruction if he is some evil master mind.

And you are right prices have been going up for years. we don't even have oil. we've pretty much took Iraq we are not fighting an army just civilians fighting guerrilla tactics. you think gas prices would have gone down by now if we have oil or were looking for oil.

we could easily make Iraq a lake if we really wanted oil and that was our only cause!


Propaganda sucks!

And even if people tell you you're wrong or make you feel stupid screw them you have a right to your opinion just like them. There is black and white and then truth in between

Wasn't the Taliban created to overthrow the Saudii government in the first place? England is affiliated with there "GOOD" friends to.Hence all the terrorist bombings and Germany as well.
So your point didn't make sense.
The house of Saud is the royal ruling family of Saudi Arabia. They are a secular government. Fundamentalist want to overthrow and in force Sharia Law which is why Africa is so crappy.

I f our goal is to take control of the oil in the middle east why aren't we controlling Kuwait's oil?

If you want any more information because I know you'll be checking mine because you called me ignorant which is like saying you're the smartest kid with down syndrome!
I read an interresting answer below wrritten by A P!
Check it out you might learn something!

Answer 6

If you think the amount of money given to Iraq isn't going to be paid back then you are living in dream land. The Iraqis will be paying the US back for years to come. It was the same with world war 2. US aid did not come free. britain only paid off their war debt to the US this year!

The Iraqi debt will probably be secured on or paid off using oil.

Answer 7

bush haters will claim anything to start a fuss. i personally think everyone wants to be an activist these days. everyone wants to be remembered like the protesters for vietnam, they want to be in our childrens history books. its for their own agenda. ....some people are soo blinded by the concept of war and this hippie peace love and happiness ideal, that they cant see we would not be the country we are today if it were not for wars. Wars gave them everything they have. War gave us independence from britain war gave blacks freedom war gave us most of the states people live in today.

Answer 8

Here is a link to some information that may shed some light on the subject for you:

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/story?id=3168889&page=1&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312

Answer 9

cmon..welcome to liberal media bias. none of this is fact based.
this was all a well orchestrated spin by liberals attempting to sell the american pubic a bill of goods. the bottom line here is all this argument was and is never about iraq. its about a well orchestrated power grab from the razor thin majority of 06 where to maintain it the democrats even had to keep a senator on voting rolls in the hospital with some type of brain issue. cmon...something stinks with this one and its kinda obivious it isnt bush.

Answer 10

You will never get the information you are seeking, because it simply is not true. We did not invade Iraq for oil or for any company.