|
Iraq
Sept 9, 2007 9:55:01 GMT -5
Post by Robespierre - P.R. of Debro on Sept 9, 2007 9:55:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
Iraq
Sept 9, 2007 11:30:03 GMT -5
Post by Kardas on Sept 9, 2007 11:30:03 GMT -5
I say it was uncessary, but not quite Nazi. Here are a couple essay points on the causes, with my opinion of course.
-The Iraq War is not about oil because if that was so, Saddam would still have stayed in power, with the major change being the oil sanctions lifted, and more deals being cut between US and Iraqi oil companies. -It is not about imperialism either, as Iraq is generally an ‘un-strategic’ region for such a thing. Using Iraq for spreading US influence wouldn’t help either as before the war; Iraq was the odd man out in Middle East government policies. -The WMD argument is in any case nullified, as none have been found yet, probably making it more a propaganda tool for the US government. However, using the war to demonstrate US resolve would make sense as it seemed that the US had ‘grown soft’. The war would be used to bring back the US’ reputation (however, the situation is looking increasingly like the Vietnam War, so it may be more a blunder of Bush). In any case, all the arguments, one way or another point to fighting post 9/11 terrorism. -Bush finished his father’s war, as Bush Senior was in power during the Gulf War. Of course, it might seems relatively irrational, but it might have influenced Bush’s thinking.
|
|
|
Iraq
Sept 9, 2007 16:34:00 GMT -5
Post by Archaix on Sept 9, 2007 16:34:00 GMT -5
I agree, although I'd also like to add that it could not possibly have been oil-motivated because oil prices are now as high as they were during the Iranian Revolution. While it's not beyond western capitalists to exploit countries for oil (see Africa) it didn't take a genius to figure out that interfering with Iraq would destabilize the already twitchy religious and ethnic conflicts going on throughout the Middle east.
However American and British military planners with far more intellect than I and with far more intelligence at their disposal must have, at some point before 2003, sat down and figured out that invading a country like Iraq with no real regard to the immense problems all ready to flourish once Saddam was removed would probably make it one of the most desperate campaigns of the new century. I don't believe they went in there for oil but they didn't go there for the weather or for the hospitality -so what did they go in for?
My own beliefs are that they had some vague notion of setting up a 'puppet' state from which they could have faced down Iran and perhaps some other troublesome nations in the region. Israel no doubt welcomed the move but I'm not suspicious enough to believe this was all dictated by them. However, considering the former point was correct this was retarded strategy anyway because Iraq is/was an 'odd man out'.
|
|
|
Iraq
Sept 10, 2007 8:32:35 GMT -5
Post by Kardas on Sept 10, 2007 8:32:35 GMT -5
Yeah, for those who didn't bother to read my points, I also believe Iraq was to demonstrate US resolve and use it as a power base.
However, whether you like it or not, it's still a Bush blunder.
|
|
|
Iraq
Sept 10, 2007 9:39:30 GMT -5
Post by Robespierre - P.R. of Debro on Sept 10, 2007 9:39:30 GMT -5
The same here...I consider the whole action as an economical necessity. See, before the war the armaments industry of the US was in great trouble. With the collapse of the USSR, and the end of the armaments race, the great corporations received less and less governmental orders. Now, with a new enemy - call it terrorism or bandit-states - this sector is stronger than ever.
New workplaces, boost to the economy. Everybody is happy....well, except those "liberated" citizens.
|
|
|
Iraq
Sept 10, 2007 15:27:11 GMT -5
Post by deutschgarten on Sept 10, 2007 15:27:11 GMT -5
I've always been agianst war unless us or our allies are in trouble and it's our last option. I know that sounds a little bit Isolationist but I think it's the only way to save lives and to better use the governments funds (see debro's quote).
|
|
|
Iraq
Sept 12, 2007 14:58:32 GMT -5
Post by numnar on Sept 12, 2007 14:58:32 GMT -5
It was unecessary and imperialist but not inspired by Nazism.
Though saying that I think mitch ben had the best idea about what it was about in the song he wrote in the early invasion period, especially with the line "he was mean to my daddy" about Dubbya... (Mitch Ben is a comedy song writer/singer and he is awsome)
It doesn't matter that much now anyway as we're being driven out just like last time (last time being the british occupation following WWI not the first gulf war in 1990-1 (can't quite remember but give me a break I was 4)).
|
|