If violence begets violence why did the neocons and the "religious" bushies dive headfirst into Iraq?

Question

what are they really up to?

Answer 1

Ok here is my case for the government -

There has been an economic war waged against the US for some time - The cold war never ended and the US's puposeful bankrupting of the Soviet Union is niether forgotten nor forgiven

As you are now aware China a communist nation linked and allied to Russia owns a lot of US bonds and a lot of the debt

Europe is at the flash point of being the worlds economic leader and oil ma end up trading in Euro's not in greenbacks

The US government realising what is going on knew that if oil traded in Euro's as Iraq wanted then the down turn in the American econom would spell absolute disaster and so the world would dictate to the US In particular socialist Europe

So the US decided to turn it all into a war they felt that they could win

Enter 9/11 Iraqi oil will be traded in US dollars and that is that

Iran who also may turn to the much more stable Euro is now in the sights of the US gun

They keep Iraq in anarchy and take Iran and or make their oil fields unusable for a substantial time and the threat of the Euro is over Not only that but if the US can control the flow of oil from Iran then it controls the economy of the nunber one economic threat Europe and the number one creditor China and the # 1 military threat - Russia

Of course if they launch an assault on Iran Russia may fight but by keeping up the pressure on Iran the Euro is for now stifled at the door Iran struggles and so on

Therefore the attack on Iraq makes sense although clearl staged no matter how you look at it

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and there was no Alquadia in Iraq when Hussian lived - There were no WMD and the inteligence was well over a decade old that justified this war on Iraq

The only way the headlong rush into war is understandable is through an economic urge to protect and a greed based need to dominate

This is the only scenario I can think of that is a "case for the government" all other views leads one to believe Bush and company were just drunk at the time

Answer 2

I'd say religion has a long history of violence. However, Bush's attempt to Christianize the middle east will be remembered as one of democracy's greatest failures. Maybe next time people will learn to ask questions. But given the cheer leading for war with Iran, I doubt it.

Answer 3

Because some violent individuals hijacked 4 of our planes and killed 3000 of our people. You know the same way a Democrat in 1941 used violence against the Axis because one of the members of that alliance murdered 2500 Americans.

Answer 4

Violence begets violence, huh? Lets see, how did that work in Germany in 1945? It seems like violence was the answer there. How about the Revolutionary War. Seems like it was the answer then also. You live in a dream world, sometimes violence is the only answer.

Answer 5

I though we went to Afghanistan first, but I could be wrong the other thing is we weren't allowed to just bomb em either place.

Answer 6

The neocons wanted to control the oil in Iraq and it is the reason why they attacked head first.

Answer 7

Paranoia, oil, and publicity.

Answer 8

Oh, that's different. Bush and the neo-cons were on a mission from Dog. Dog spoke to Bush via a burning marijuana plant and told him to go ye forth and slay the beasts of the wilderness. Dog then gave Bush Ten Lies to lead his people to the promised land of oil and honey.

Answer 9

both parties were in favor of war....."inconvenient truth?"