Lying about war reasons
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-06-2012, 10:40 AM
RE: Lying about war reasons
I remember very clearly the build up to war in Iraq both in 1990 (I was a senior in college) and this last one after 9/11.

I think we went to war in 1990 because Saddam Hussein was a tyrant and the US and the UK were very afraid of him getting control of the Kuwaiti oil fields. We certainly didn't do it because we gave a whit about Kuwait, a country who stood strongly against US interests more than pretty much every other country on the globe up to that point. And, while it was not directly for oil (meaning we didn't mean to take the oil for ourselves), it was absolutely about the oil economy.

I think Iraq 2.0 was a little more complicated. 9/11 was certainly a catalyst in the sense that it made it a lot easier to get the country behind the idea of going to war in Iraq but that is not why we went to war there (although judging by a lot of the rhetoric at the time you would have thought differently. There was a poll back in like 2003 where some ridiculous number (like 70%) of the US thought Saddam Hussein was behind the 9/11 attacks). I don't think we went there because of the war in terror either, as there is plenty of evidence that Bush was spoiling to go into Iraq as soon as he took office. It absolutely had nothing to do with freeing the Iraqi people from tyranny. If that was true, Bush would have sent troops to half of Africa, Burma, North Korea, etc., and he never once indicated any intention of doing that. So, why go in?

The obvious answer is oil but I'm not convinced that is the actual answer. I disagree with GermanyT's theory on the economic disruption theory because I really think Bush and Co. thought this was going to be a cake-walk and over in 3 months and we set up a new, happy government. Never underestimate the power of stupidity in shaping opinions. And, I think it is probably that oil played a part in the calculations too, but I don't think that was the primary driver.

I have no idea what that primary driver was and can only guess. Maybe it's because Saddam tried to have Bush's dad killed. Maybe it's because Bush felt bad about weaseling out of service in Viet Nam and wanted to show what a tough guy he was. Maybe it's because Bush got food poisoning at an Iraqi restaurant one time. Who knows. Oil is as good an excuse as any, I guess, but I really think that is just too convenient. The truth almost has to include the possibility that these guys really convinced themselves there was a national security risk in play. Sure, they ignored all evidence contradicting the WMD theory but the idea that they sat in a room planning to just go to war to take oil seems unlikely.

Btw, don't confuse the current issues in the market for oil with what happened 10 years. A has nothing to do with B. Current oil prices have almost nothing to do with the actual supply or demand of the product.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: