Why is the US still in Iraq?

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: nick1985

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: nick1985

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: nick1985

Originally posted by: jpeyton
We're still in Iraq because there is a lot of goddamn profit to be made for American companies there. That's the bottom line.

or maybe could it be that if we left the country would return to COMPLETE chaos and the terrorists could take control of the country?

your an idiot.

Yes I'm sure that if Halliburton was bidding on non-profit contracts, and if Iraq did not have oil reserves, we'd be there just to free the Iraqi people from the goodness of our hearts. Yup, keep dreaming.

im so sick of the whole "were there for oil" conspiricy. if we left, the country would go completely to shambles, which would make the administration, and america look bad. we will stay the course to make sure this doesnt happen. is it that hard to get through your thick liberal skull?

I agree, politics is the reason we're there now. Politics, profit, and oil were the reason for entering in the first place. Sorry for the confusion.

kthxbye

show me proof we went for oil. you liberals will believe any conspiricy theory concieved....kthxbye

Well let's use the Bushies own logic to solve this argument. Instead of proving they went there for oil, why don't you prove the existence of the WMD that violated the UN resolution which the US incorrectly justified as permission to use military force in Iraq.

EDIT: And I do explicitly mean WMD that were operational or close to a state of operation. I do not mean weapons that were already destroyed, or "weapons labs" without a trace of chem/bio weapons.

 

[B00ne]

Ndee - where have you been hiding your head? What kind of question is that? You cannot just start a war in a random country, set it all ablaze and then leave (Well theoretically you could, but ...). Not even the US can do that. They have to finish the job they started. They can leave when Iraq has a stable government. And certainly it would not be in the US interest to leave Iraq in turmoil and possibly have a third party pick up the juicy bits.

Btw - I dont think they will leave later either. Iraq is in a strategically good position to have a base there...

 

[Conky]

Originally posted by: ndee
I'm really wondering. Why did Bush say the war is not over yet? What else do they need to do? Don't wanna start a flame-war so flamers, take your posts somewhere else.

If you don't intend to start a flamewar then why do ask such a stupid question? And by stupid, I am being nice... moronic is more like it.

Should we just leave now and let Osama take over? Seriously, answer my question... if we leave now, what happens to the leadership of Iraq without the USA to encourage free elections?

You aren't even a good spammer.

 

[Ryan]

Originally posted by: ndee
I'm really wondering. Why did Bush say the war is not over yet? What else do they need to do? Don't wanna start a flame-war so flamers, take your posts somewhere else.

Why is the whole world asking this question, even though President Bush said our job in Iraq would last for YEARS? We've said this since before the war started. We just can't leave, we have obligations to the Iraqis. The war was the easy part, we now have to rebuild this country and bring order to the region, which is in itself an even larger war, a war against anarchy and disorder.

Use a little common sense, educate yourself on the situation before asing questions. I have a feeling this is why must of the international community has a general distaste for our actions, they use FUD (Fear Uncertainty and Doubt) to make stupid arguments. Not only that, but they just to fallacious conclusions like "the war was about oil", "Bush jr. is just finishing his fathers job", etc, etc, etc. Ignorance is what is fueling this hatred.

 

[Genesys]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
We're still in Iraq because there is a lot of goddamn profit to be made for American companies there. That's the bottom line.

awefully cynical of you sir.

 

[Fencer128]

[with reference to Iran-Iraq war]why didn't they let them cancel out themselves? I may sound like a liberal whatever but why did they make it their problem? Like... why couldn't they just let them alone and fight?

We did. Everything came to a stalemate in 1988. BTW, we didn't start any war. Hussein, claiming Kuwait as Iraq's historical 19th province, invaded his smaller neighbor. There was a call for action and the international community responded.

What is your definition of "let them alone"?

Cheers,

Andy

 

[Czar]

Very simple, if the US leaves now there will be a civil war, and then people can surely say that things were better when Saddam was around

 

[Fencer128]

Originally posted by: Czar
Very simple, if the US leaves now there will be a civil war, and then people can surely say that things were better when Saddam was around

Sorry - I wasn't referring to the current Iraqi situation, the quote was taken from a comment concerning the Iran-Iraq war. You'll have to scan a little further up the thread to see it.

I realise that it's a good thing that the coalition is still in Iraq right now!

Cheers,

Andy

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: Fencer128

Originally posted by: Czar
Very simple, if the US leaves now there will be a civil war, and then people can surely say that things were better when Saddam was around

Sorry - I wasn't referring to the current Iraqi situation, the quote was taken from a comment concerning the Iran-Iraq war. You'll have to scan a little further up the thread to see it.

I realise that it's a good thing that the coalition is still in Iraq right now!

Cheers,

Andy

oh no I wasent refering to your reply
it was just a general reply to the topic

 

[ndee]

Originally posted by: rbloedow

Originally posted by: ndee
I'm really wondering. Why did Bush say the war is not over yet? What else do they need to do? Don't wanna start a flame-war so flamers, take your posts somewhere else.

Why is the whole world asking this question, even though President Bush said our job in Iraq would last for YEARS? We've said this since before the war started. We just can't leave, we have obligations to the Iraqis. The war was the easy part, we now have to rebuild this country and bring order to the region, which is in itself an even larger war, a war against anarchy and disorder.

Use a little common sense, educate yourself on the situation before asing questions. I have a feeling this is why must of the international community has a general distaste for our actions, they use FUD (Fear Uncertainty and Doubt) to make stupid arguments. Not only that, but they just to fallacious conclusions like "the war was about oil", "Bush jr. is just finishing his fathers job", etc, etc, etc. Ignorance is what is fueling this hatred.

Why did you guys invade in the first place? Wasn't it only about WMDs?

 

[ndee]

Originally posted by: Crazyfool

Originally posted by: ndee
I'm really wondering. Why did Bush say the war is not over yet? What else do they need to do? Don't wanna start a flame-war so flamers, take your posts somewhere else.

If you don't intend to start a flamewar then why do ask such a stupid question? And by stupid, I am being nice... moronic is more like it.

Should we just leave now and let Osama take over? Seriously, answer my question... if we leave now, what happens to the leadership of Iraq without the USA to encourage free elections?

You aren't even a good spammer.

Ahm... do you know that Osama and Saddam hate each other?

 

[Pepsei]

We still haven't drain all the oil yet.

Oh yeah, the rebuilding of the nation is not done yet, so we can't leave. Seriously, if we leave now, that place will turn into hell on earth.

 

[Fencer128]

Originally posted by: ndee

Originally posted by: rbloedow

Originally posted by: ndee
I'm really wondering. Why did Bush say the war is not over yet? What else do they need to do? Don't wanna start a flame-war so flamers, take your posts somewhere else.

Why is the whole world asking this question, even though President Bush said our job in Iraq would last for YEARS? We've said this since before the war started. We just can't leave, we have obligations to the Iraqis. The war was the easy part, we now have to rebuild this country and bring order to the region, which is in itself an even larger war, a war against anarchy and disorder.

Use a little common sense, educate yourself on the situation before asing questions. I have a feeling this is why must of the international community has a general distaste for our actions, they use FUD (Fear Uncertainty and Doubt) to make stupid arguments. Not only that, but they just to fallacious conclusions like "the war was about oil", "Bush jr. is just finishing his fathers job", etc, etc, etc. Ignorance is what is fueling this hatred.

Why did you guys invade in the first place? Wasn't it only about WMDs?

National security fueled by the fear of the use or sale of WMD. IMHO the only question to be asked of governments is:

Did you believe your intelligence to be sound?

At least from a UK perspective. I see no other valid reasons for which UK military personnel should be dying over this.

Cheers,

Andy

 

[Fencer128]

Ahm... do you know that Osama and Saddam hate each other?

Pruely speculation of course, but *usually* the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Tends to be true so I'd err on that side of the arguement on this point.

Cheers,

Andy

 

[ndee]

Originally posted by: Fencer128

Ahm... do you know that Osama and Saddam hate each other?

Pruely speculation of course, but *usually* the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Tends to be true so I'd err on that side of the arguement on this point.

Cheers,

Andy

All Arabs might hate the US but IIRC, Osama was on the Iran-side in the Iraq-Iran war.

 

[Fencer128]

Originally posted by: ndee

Originally posted by: Fencer128

Ahm... do you know that Osama and Saddam hate each other?

Pruely speculation of course, but *usually* the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Tends to be true so I'd err on that side of the arguement on this point.

Cheers,

Andy

All Arabs might hate the US but IIRC, Osama was on the Iran-side in the Iraq-Iran war.

But still. Remember - where did Saddam have his airforce fly to during the '91 war? The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Cheers,

Andy

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Fencer128

But still. Remember - where did Saddam have his airforce fly to during the '91 war? The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Cheers,

Andy

How much of the AF was actually returned by Iran?

 

[Fencer128]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper

Originally posted by: Fencer128

But still. Remember - where did Saddam have his airforce fly to during the '91 war? The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Cheers,

Andy

How much of the AF was actually returned by Iran?

Nothing I believe - but at the time he still would rather give the airforce to his "number 2" enemy than his "number 1" enemy (i.e. the coalition). He chose the enemy of his enemy.

Cheers,

Andy

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: ndee
I'm really wondering. Why did Bush say the war is not over yet? What else do they need to do? Don't wanna start a flame-war so flamers, take your posts somewhere else.

Because we removed the government of Saddam Hussein and I don't think you can put together a replacement government in 3 days.

 

[ndee]

OK, so after all, the reason the US invaded Iraq is cuz they were afraid that Iraq might sell WMDs to some terrorist organization, right?

 

[alexruiz]

Originally posted by: nick1985


show me proof we went for oil. you liberals will believe any conspiricy theory concieved....kthxbye

Do you see what I bolded? "WE" is a bit of a multitude... you are not and never were included in that multitude.
You (as everyone else supporting the invasion) are just pawns in the sytem. The OIL was NEVER intended to be for you or your benefit..... Tough to understand? You pay the same price you have been paying for your gas, and you will keep paying those same prices. However, the PROFITS for that same oil explotation for the SAME gas you are using now are going to different hands..... I think you got the picture. Ahh, and before you start yelling it is a CONSEQUENCE, stop and think a little.... it was part of the CAUSE! Sorry, you are out of the rewards.

Amazing what a little brainwashing can do......

Now go back to watch your TV

 

[Fencer128]

Originally posted by: alexruiz

Originally posted by: nick1985


show me proof we went for oil. you liberals will believe any conspiricy theory concieved....kthxbye

Do you see what I bolded? "WE" is a bit of a multitude... you are not and never were included in that multitude.
You (as everyone else supporting the invasion) are just pawns in the sytem. The OIL was NEVER intended to be for you or your benefit..... Tough to understand? You pay the same price you have been paying for your gas, and you will keep paying those same prices. However, the PROFITS for that same oil explotation for the SAME gas you are using now are going to different hands..... I think you got the picture. Ahh, and before you start yelling it is a CONSEQUENCE, stop and think a little.... it was part of the CAUSE! Sorry, you are out of the rewards.

Amazing what a little brainwashing can do......

Now go back to watch your TV

You need facts to back that up though. The "other side" can equally stand up, say what they believe and claim to be right.

Cheers,

Andy

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: ndee
OK, so after all, the reason the US invaded Iraq is cuz they were afraid that Iraq might sell WMDs to some terrorist organization, right?

That was part of the argument. Although many call it a pre-emptive action, we should not forget this was an extension of the first gulf war. Saddam was under U.N. sanctions and was extremely uncooperative.

 

[ndee]

Originally posted by: rudder

Originally posted by: ndee
OK, so after all, the reason the US invaded Iraq is cuz they were afraid that Iraq might sell WMDs to some terrorist organization, right?

That was part of the argument. Although many call it a pre-emptive action, we should not forget this was an extension of the first gulf war. Saddam was under U.N. sanctions and was extremely uncooperative.

OK. I think I got it now. I still find it stupid to launch such a war as a pre-emptive action but I can... not understand it but know where you guys are coming from. Of course Saddam is a sick guy who threated his people like shiet but there are other countries where that happens too. Let's agree that we disagree

 

[alexruiz]

Originally posted by: Fencer128

Originally posted by: alexruiz

Originally posted by: nick1985


show me proof we went for oil. you liberals will believe any conspiricy theory concieved....kthxbye

Do you see what I bolded? "WE" is a bit of a multitude... you are not and never were included in that multitude.
You (as everyone else supporting the invasion) are just pawns in the sytem. The OIL was NEVER intended to be for you or your benefit..... Tough to understand? You pay the same price you have been paying for your gas, and you will keep paying those same prices. However, the PROFITS for that same oil explotation for the SAME gas you are using now are going to different hands..... I think you got the picture. Ahh, and before you start yelling it is a CONSEQUENCE, stop and think a little.... it was part of the CAUSE! Sorry, you are out of the rewards.

Amazing what a little brainwashing can do......

Now go back to watch your TV

You need facts to back that up though. The "other side" can equally stand up, say what they believe and claim to be right.

Cheers,

Andy

That is a tough point.... What proof would be contundent? A recorded conversation (phone or live) between dubya and the halliburton people talking about "opportunity for a very important company that is vital to the USA leadership in a new market that is not very friendly towards the country, but despite the challenges there should be a way to make it happen, specially if some other factors are weighted and A REASON is found to pursue the business......" Does it sound right?

If that proof is needed, it is not going to happen. Maybe you can call them and ask them for a declaration or acceptance. ..... BIG TICKET CORRUPTION has always been subtle, until the consequences are too big and it is too late to revert it. ENRON? MCI? I don't think those people gave proof about the scams or accpeted it.... the scams were uncovered because the consequences were already taking a hit into the corporations. Have the corporations not faced economic problems, management would have walked away with he scams......

Andy, what kinf of proof would be considered as enough?