Let's Speculate as to the REAL motive behind the invasion of Iraq

[Sallow]

cute, you seem to think controlling the ME oil will result in cheap oil for the diamond daves. lol

It's fucking incredibly amazing how seriously stupid these people are about economics.

Half the time I keep thinking..well it's unfair that we have obscenely wealthly people in the country while many are direly poor.

Then I see some of the direly poor..and think, fuck..if they can scam the country out of money because the people are so damned idiotic...well..then..they deserve it.

Actually it's even worse in EU nations, they do that while pretending there are no poor people or unemployed, plus push the scam that thanks to democratic socialism/social democracy there will be no poor people some day. Makes a great Utopian fantasy novel, but every economist with a brain (and not using it to lie to make themselves money) realizes that socialism/social democracy as well as the current US economic system are all failed economic policies.

The best economic policies are now to be found in Asian nations that don't focus on an overbearing welfare state and instead provide jobs and living wages for their people like they do in South Korea (which has had near enough the OECD's lowest unemployment for several years in a row).

SOUTH KOREA?? You can't be serious. That would mean finding a patron state like the United States to cover the expense of the military..among other subsidies.

And if you really want to follow the Asian model..good luck

-Get rid of patents and copyrights.
-Anything that can be sold..will be sold.
-Rules? Regulations? Who needs that. Buyer beware. If you eat it..and it doesn't kill you..it's probably safe.
-Brick and mortar stores? Screw that..set up shop anywhere.
-Screw everyone except family..and with family there are exceptions.
-Hey..if you can put a bed there..it's home. 20 people in a one bedroom apartment? No problemo.
-Work until you die..literally.

 

[Mr Natural]

The attacks of 9/11 were just a good excuse for the Bushs' to help out their Saudi business partners by getting rid of Saddam for them and saving them billions in military expenditures of their own.

 

[High_Gravity]

It's fucking incredibly amazing how seriously stupid these people are about economics.

Half the time I keep thinking..well it's unfair that we have obscenely wealthly people in the country while many are direly poor.

Then I see some of the direly poor..and think, fuck..if they can scam the country out of money because the people are so damned idiotic...well..then..they deserve it.

Actually it's even worse in EU nations, they do that while pretending there are no poor people or unemployed, plus push the scam that thanks to democratic socialism/social democracy there will be no poor people some day. Makes a great Utopian fantasy novel, but every economist with a brain (and not using it to lie to make themselves money) realizes that socialism/social democracy as well as the current US economic system are all failed economic policies.

The best economic policies are now to be found in Asian nations that don't focus on an overbearing welfare state and instead provide jobs and living wages for their people like they do in South Korea (which has had near enough the OECD's lowest unemployment for several years in a row).

SOUTH KOREA?? You can't be serious. That would mean finding a patron state like the United States to cover the expense of the military..among other subsidies.

And if you really want to follow the Asian model..good luck

-Get rid of patents and copyrights.
-Anything that can be sold..will be sold.
-Rules? Regulations? Who needs that. Buyer beware. If you eat it..and it doesn't kill you..it's probably safe.
-Brick and mortar stores? Screw that..set up shop anywhere.
-Screw everyone except family..and with family there are exceptions.
-Hey..if you can put a bed there..it's home. 20 people in a one bedroom apartment? No problemo.
-Work until you die..literally.

Saudi Arabia is the example we should follow.

 

[BlindBoo]

A bunch of reasons that added up in their NeoCon, delusional minds.

1) Free a people from the tyranny of an evil dictator
2) Create a Democracy smack dab in the middle of that part of the world
3) Unfinished business, clean up for Daddy
4) Oil

Not on the list is WMDs, because I don't believe that was part of the equation. It was purely a tactic to get the American People, Congress, the Rest of the World, the media, and some of the people in the room helping make the decision on board.

The smart people in the room almost certainly knew that Saddam had no WMDs to be concerned about. At best, it was a minimal, periphery reason for going.

It was very obvious when Colin Powell was used as a pitch man for the War that he didn't believe what he was saying and his heart wasn't in it. He hated Saddam a lot, but couldn't stand lying to the American people and everyone else...and didn't think it was an excuse to go to War. That's my opinion anyway. I think he convinced himself that in the chain of command, the Commander in Chief gave him a direct order and if he couldn't convince him of a different course of action, he'd have to go along with the plan. in his eyes, he was caught between a rock and a hard place and had to go along. I'll always believe that. Cheney might have been the mastermind, and Bushy, a pawn.

1, 2 and 3. No 4. Yes.

The smart people in the room know that the American leadership supports tyrants all arround the world and freeing people is the last thing on their "things to do" list. If it was wrong for the Communist to export communism why is it exceptable to export our form of goverment.

"Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security."

It was the Iraqi citizen "right", or rather their "duty" to throw off the bonds of oppression. (In fact they tried that after the first war and then President Bush ignored their pleas for help)

Furthermore, no where in the Constitution does it give the Governement the right to use the military in such a fashion.

As far as Daddy's unfinished business, here's what Pappa had to say about invading Iraq to dethrone Saddam.

Excerpt from "Why We Didn't Remove Saddam" by George Bush [Sr.] and Brent Scowcroft, Time (2 March 1998):

While we hoped that popular revolt or coup would topple Saddam, neither the U.S. nor the countries of the region wished to see the breakup of the Iraqi state. We were concerned about the long-term balance of power at the head of the Gulf. Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not changing objectives in midstream, engaging in "mission creep," and would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. We had been unable to find Noriega in Panama, which we knew intimately. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. The coalition would instantly have collapsed, the Arabs deserting it in anger and other allies pulling out as well. Under those circumstances, furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-cold war world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the U.N.'s mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the U.S. could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land.

So his son, President Bush help to destroy the pattern for handling aggression in the post cold-war era that his father helped set by becoming the aggressor.

That leave only number 4. Control Oil.

 

[midcan5]

Hubris, spite, vainglory, lies upon lies, wrong expectations, 911, historically and in all other ways uneducated men, massive military power, empire, values, business, groupthink, a weak congress, fear, propaganda, a mostly passive public, because they could....


"I have occasionally mentioned that I very frequently challenge myself with regard to the validity of my own views. I think anyone who is seriously concerned with ideas, as I endeavor to be, must do this, at least to some extent. As new evidence accumulates, we need to ask ourselves: do my ideas account for these developments -- or do new events call into question what I had previously thought? Is this recent occurrence explained by ideas I have discussed before, or does this represent some new phenomenon? Do my previously-held views explain this development sufficiently, or do they need to be modified in some way? That's just a sample of some of the questions that come up as I continually examine and re-examine my ideas and theories; there are usually considerably more." Arthur Silber Once Upon a Time...: In Service of the New Fascism


Once Upon a Time...: Trapped in the Wrong Paradigm: Three Handy Rules


"There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action." Downing Street Memo

 

[hipeter924]

It's fucking incredibly amazing how seriously stupid these people are about economics.

Half the time I keep thinking..well it's unfair that we have obscenely wealthly people in the country while many are direly poor.

Then I see some of the direly poor..and think, fuck..if they can scam the country out of money because the people are so damned idiotic...well..then..they deserve it.

Actually it's even worse in EU nations, they do that while pretending there are no poor people or unemployed, plus push the scam that thanks to democratic socialism/social democracy there will be no poor people some day. Makes a great Utopian fantasy novel, but every economist with a brain (and not using it to lie to make themselves money) realizes that socialism/social democracy as well as the current US economic system are all failed economic policies.

The best economic policies are now to be found in Asian nations that don't focus on an overbearing welfare state and instead provide jobs and living wages for their people like they do in South Korea (which has had near enough the OECD's lowest unemployment for several years in a row).

SOUTH KOREA?? You can't be serious. That would mean finding a patron state like the United States to cover the expense of the military..among other subsidies.

And if you really want to follow the Asian model..good luck

-Get rid of patents and copyrights.
-Anything that can be sold..will be sold.
-Rules? Regulations? Who needs that. Buyer beware. If you eat it..and it doesn't kill you..it's probably safe.
-Brick and mortar stores? Screw that..set up shop anywhere.
-Screw everyone except family..and with family there are exceptions.
-Hey..if you can put a bed there..it's home. 20 people in a one bedroom apartment? No problemo.
-Work until you die..literally.

You must be a proud supporter of the pharmaceutical industry, even if billions of people (including Americans) can't afford medicine because of excessive copyrights and patents and subsequently die or live in hellish pain for the rest of their lives, also if you read up more you would find that South Korea, Japan and Singapore all respect copyrights.

Also who pays your check, it certainty isn't US taxpayers but Asian banks, without which you would just be a bum on the street, even Democrats know that, if you are a Democrat...consider joining the US communist party, then again they would dump you out because you support the said copyrights and patents. Have fun walking that line.

 

[M14 Shooter]

With so many liberals around, there's a shortage of sand for their boxes.
The logical solution was to go to war for silicates.

 

[High_Gravity]

We invaded Iraq for pussy.

 

[Ropey]

Oh, yes.

 

[goldcatt]

Pure speculation? Because his Dad didn't, and it probably cost him enough support among the hawks to kill his re-election. Yes, he had a tanking economy too, but IMO it was the failure to take Iraq that pushed enough conservative support to Perot to allow a Clinton victory. No good deed goes unpunished.

Remember Cheney wanted to take Baghdad the first time around and got shot down because Bush the Elder was smart enough to know the fallout wouldn't be flowers and parades. Wouldn't have been hard to convince Junior to finish what Dad started. And Cheney had a few axes to grind and some cash to be made.

 

[High_Gravity]

Oh, yes.

Israeli women are sexy as hell.

 

[Ropey]

Oh, yes.

Israeli women are sexy as hell.

Oh, tell me about it. I spend four months a year in Israel.

 

[High_Gravity]

Oh, yes.

Israeli women are sexy as hell.

Oh, tell me about it. I spend four months a year in Israel.

I used to date an Israeli girl who had prior service in the Military, 4 of the best months in my life.

 

[Ropey]

Israeli women are sexy as hell.

Oh, tell me about it. I spend four months a year in Israel.

I used to date an Israeli girl who had prior service in the Military, 4 of the best months in my life.

Yes, Israeli women are quite aggressive.

It comes from not being frightened of your men.

 

[High_Gravity]

Oh, tell me about it. I spend four months a year in Israel.

I used to date an Israeli girl who had prior service in the Military, 4 of the best months in my life.

Yes, Israeli women are quite aggressive.

It comes from not being frightened of your men.

No doubt, the girl I was seeing said she got the same training in the Military as the men did and was held to the same standard, and actually saw live combat. Israeli women are bad ass.

 

[HinduPatriot]

Israeli women are sexy as hell.

Oh, tell me about it. I spend four months a year in Israel.

I used to date an Israeli girl who had prior service in the Military, 4 of the best months in my life.

I had sex with an Israeli women who came to India after her stint in the IDF. She was an awesome lay.

 

[High_Gravity]

Oh, tell me about it. I spend four months a year in Israel.

I used to date an Israeli girl who had prior service in the Military, 4 of the best months in my life.

I had sex with an Israeli women who came to India after her stint in the IDF. She was an awesome lay.

Hell yeah!

 

[editec]

I think that seldom does this nation undertake such a operation with ONLY one causus belli

I think that the served MULTIPLE interests.

It secured the oil of Iraq.

It made a LOT of Bush II and Cheyney's political cronnies very very rich.

It took out a rogue CIA agent (SAddam) who might have become an embarrassment for the CIA.

Its gave Bush II a woodie so he wouldn't feel like he was standing in his father's shadow.

It gave us a base of operations to dominate the rest of central Asia.

It continued the longer range plan of the NEO-Cons to bankrupt this nations federal government.

 

[kwc57]

Hegemony.

Bush and his inner circle wanted to build a better world that was more friendly to the US. They convinced themselves of the misguided notion that people the world over want to be just like America. If they could create a spark by taking over a weak state like Iraq and establish a strong working democracy, a wild fire would ensue where all of the surrounding states would revolt and follow suite. They were wrong. Everyone doesn't want to be like us. It was a failed social experiment.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

For control of Sumerian technology.

You people are so uneducated and illiterate, it's no wonder you're so easily misled.