English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-10-27 14:42:12 · 19 answers · asked by Page 4 in Politics & Government Politics

Or both...

Just Roving..

2007-10-27 14:42:41 · update #1

19 answers

it is mainly Zionist supremacist inspired. They want to Balkanize the countries of the Middle East and will use US firepower to do it. Th oilmen like the fact that crises drive up the price of oil on the Global market too. But many oilmen would have preferred a more even handed approach to the middle east i.e. one that alt least pretends to see non-jews there as human beings.

2007-10-28 04:29:13 · answer #1 · answered by John M 4 · 2 0

these should leave nobody in any doubt:

http://www.theunjustmedia.com/the%20zionist_plan_for_the_middle_east.htm
"The plan operates on two essential premises. To survive, Israel must 1) become an imperial regional power, and 2) must effect the division of the whole area into small states by the dissolution of all existing Arab states. Small here will depend on the ethnic or sectarian composition of each state. Consequently, the Zionist hope is that sectarian-based states become Israel's satellites and, ironically, its source of moral legitimation"

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1438.htm

"Following is a report prepared by The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies’ "Study Group on a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000." The main substantive ideas in this paper emerge from a discussion in which prominent opinion makers, including Richard Perle, James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks, Jr., Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser participated. The report, entitled "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm," is the framework for a series of follow-up reports on strategy"

familiar names.

2007-10-27 15:14:46 · answer #2 · answered by celvin 7 · 1 0

Combination of both
The two fundamental reasons are (1) Oil, and (2) Israel. But the mechanical reasons are (1) the neocon lobby, (2) Cheney as VP, and (3) Bush's desire to prove himself and best his father. The neocons discuss mainly on the needs of Israel (the WMD they were truely concerned about were Scuds aimed at Israel), but Cheney and Rumsfeld may be more focussed on oil.
http://zfacts.com/p/775.html

And it gets even more bizarre.
The United States has asked Israel to check the possibility of pumping oil from Iraq to the oil refineries in Haifa. The request came in a telegram from a senior Pentagon official to a top Foreign Ministry official in Jerusalem. The Prime Minister's Office, which views the pipeline to Haifa as a "bonus" the U.S. could give to Israel in return for its unequivocal support for the American-led campaign in Iraq, had asked the Americans for the official telegram.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=332835&contrassID=2&subContrassID=1&sbSubContrassID=0&listScr=Y]Haaretz

Oil or Israel? Both and even oil for Israel

2007-10-28 00:39:52 · answer #3 · answered by justgoodfolk 7 · 2 0

Oil and money only. Helping Israel might have been a secondary reason for some of those involved, but this would have only been good for Israel if we would have completely wiped out the country and killed everyone. This will probably end up being bad for Israel if Iraq is eventually taken over by religious lunatics.

2007-10-27 16:22:13 · answer #4 · answered by Alan S 6 · 1 2

Both. If it is about nuclear weapon then why not attack North Korea? Jewish people are smart and rich, they would fund many political campaign so when elected these politicians are their puppet. I am not against the Jews, I am simply say that they are smarter than the Arabs. The Arabs are so full of hatred that they can't think clearly and resorted to kill one another instead of united against Israel. We hanged Saddam so we can put a puppet government in Iraq that will listen to us so we can indirectly control their oil export.

2007-10-27 14:51:03 · answer #5 · answered by gannoway 6 · 3 1

Its mainly about oil thats for sure. Its about israel too cause saddam didnt appreciate illegal occupation but since now that saddam is gone israel has 1 fewer enemy and our goverment can move on to confronting iran and syria for israels interest.

2007-10-27 15:10:50 · answer #6 · answered by Bassman 5 · 2 0

Well it's not about the defence of the camel and date trade, and Bush is an Oil man. America is getting hungrier for more and more oil and it's voters will vote out anyone who puts the price of gas up too much. Israel always does what it wants, and has trashed the Arab armies in the past and Saddam wasn't threatening Israel directly, more Syria and Iran, and they haven't been invaded. SO guess!!

2007-10-27 14:55:35 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 3

Or neither.

The Iraq War is about Iraq.

For America's detractor's the Iraq War is about America.

2007-10-28 07:30:53 · answer #8 · answered by BMCR 7 · 0 1

Where is the oil? You people bleat "it's about the oil" constantly, but where the hell is the oil we are supposedly stealing?
I would guess you would claim Bush is burying the millions of drums on his Crawford ranch, because honey, we sure aren't getting any cheap gas here like we would be if the US were taking it.

Plus, Israel has been quite able to take care of itself, in case you haven't noticed.

2007-10-27 14:56:14 · answer #9 · answered by dave b 6 · 1 2

Well, we are not getting any oil....and Israel is not safer.....

I just think it was about some stupid naive wilsonian neocon half brained Idea Bush had that made him think they would name a street after him in Baghdad. he got pushed along with his smart idea by adding that they thought Oil would pay for everything, and everyone would be happy, and Iraq would be the new KSA ally, ect ect

2007-10-27 14:45:24 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2 4

fedest.com, questions and answers