Why we invaded Iraq

There’s been discussion as to how and why we invaded Iraq.
Whatever the justification was, objectively the ends justified the means.
Whoaaa they say! That’s awful!
We invaded Iraq for oil. Elementary. Everyone knows this.
There are growing sphere’s of influence in the world that are unique to history. At least back until the time of trade with China and wooden ships.
At that time China was a pretty big player in World Trade. So was India. India was different…she was always subjugated by foreign powers.(Persia, Britain etc.)
China after being relegated to a non-player in world trade and undergoing her own internal and external problems(Opium Wars, Spice Wars, Wars with Russia, wars with Japan, wars with the US. Sectarian conflict etc…) just kind of fell off the map. Disappeared.
India too was ravished and left to her own devices economically.
Not anymore.
Now contrary to what many people might think about Global trade and world unity, these powers are growing.
Like I have said many times in other threads, we have begun to feel the effects of their growth.
If you’re a Wall St investor, you’re feeling the effects short term in the present growth of those 2 economies. You are making a bundle.
If you are a worker in Europe or the US not so much…
Iraq was a great ally of the US as much of the Middle East was…for oil. We all know this.
The Middle East, although we wouldn’t know this because we only pay attention to Israeli-Middle east conflicts and occasional Muslim Terrorist news splashes actually has their own economic destiny unfolding in real time.
IE, they too are feeling the crunch of those 2 superpowers. Others too.(the whole world is brewing up.)
If you don’t think that China or Russia or India doesn’t have designs on Middle Eastern Oil you had better wake up.
And it isn’t about globally traded shares of oil. It isn’t about Shell or Exxon. It’s not about who is communist or who is capitalist. Who’s a democracy and who is a dictatorship. It’s about who exerts control over those oil rich areas.
Who’s willing to placate or subjugate the Middle East most effectively-that’s what it’s about.
Obviously deep seated strategic policy analysts for decades have known these times were coming. I’m sure this was all predicted after WWII.
Plans were being discussed then. There’s no doubt about it.
Now many of you can have expressions like…“Well we need alternate energy sources!” “We can all get along!” “Oil is traded publicly-there’s no need to fight over it”.
That’s all irrelevant. And most of it is wrong. Because long term oil strategic planning doesn’t take into account Markets, peace, or alternate energy sources.
it takes into account SPHERES OF INFLUENCE. Wrong or right…that’s the facts.
Now I will end this by taking on a character…
Ned Beatty in “Network” talking to Howard Beale in the conference room…
Every single person on this Forum and friends and family of everyone you know, has their veins awash in oil.
Your blood is made out of oil! Your life is oil.

I agree that control of oil supply was the main reason for the invasion. That is why a bit back I posted my support for safe hydraulic fracting of gas in the US. It much lessens our dependence of foreign energy sources and therefore the necessity of military intervention, not to mention how much less of a contribution to global warming gas has as compared to coal.

I agree that control of oil supply was the main reason for the invasion. That is why a bit back I posted my support for safe hydraulic fracting of gas in the US. It much lessens our dependence of foreign energy sources and therefore the necessity of military intervention, not to mention how much less of a contribution to global warming gas has as compared to coal.
Yeah Gary, I don't know. It's not just about how much oil we need. It's about how much oil everyone else needs too. And when does that start cutting into our supply. How do we protect our supply. Maybe there is a serious race to become energy independent. Maybe there is a serious race to become free from the chains of oil slavery. But if there is...I'm not seeing any serious signs of it. Just window dressing. Who knows?

Few here would disagree that the US engages in imperialism. What is your driving point?

Few here would disagree that the US engages in imperialism. What is your driving point?
That's not what my text said. My driving point for you is until you understand how the world really works, quit whining. What is your point with all this whining and complaining? If have to hear you complain about Obama is not getting enough criticism and "why isn't everybody berating Obama? wah wah wah!" That's why I posted that text above..to show you that you don't have a point. Your just a misguided pawn mouthpiece. You're sitting around critiquing the players and the set, and you have no idea who wrote the play! You don't even know what the play is about! That's my point!! So please stop squeaking. Same with Scott and Cussbert. Flippin bozos...come on here slinging your paranoid conspiracies and your shallow minded critiques of politics. It's like goofball night down at Starbucks or something. Bunch of 20 something nerds who have motormouths and too much coffee. Learn what the show is about, then critique the actors and the plot. Pages and pages from you..and what do we have? 9-11 was fishy and Obama isn't being critiqued enough! That's it. What do you really have to say? Nothing. Just crap you heard off the internet. And complaints about how your Libertarian-Socialist revolution is taking too long. Wake up. And don't forget to pray to the oil gods either! :lol:
Few here would disagree that the US engages in imperialism. What is your driving point?
That's not what my text said. My driving point for you is until you understand how the world really works, quit whining. What is your point with all this whining and complaining? If have to hear you complain about Obama is not getting enough criticism and "why isn't everybody berating Obama? wah wah wah!" That's why I posted that text above..to show you that you don't have a point. Your just a misguided pawn mouthpiece. You're sitting around critiquing the players and the set, and you have no idea who wrote the play! You don't even know what the play is about! That's my point!! So please stop squeaking. Same with Scott and Cussbert. Flippin bozos...come on here slinging your paranoid conspiracies and your shallow minded critiques of politics. It's like goofball night down at Starbucks or something. Bunch of 20 something nerds who have motormouths and too much coffee. Learn what the show is about, then critique the actors and the plot. Pages and pages from you..and what do we have? 9-11 was fishy and Obama isn't being critiqued enough! That's it. What do you really have to say? Nothing. Just crap you heard off the internet. And complaints about how your Libertarian-Socialist revolution is taking too long. Wake up. And don't forget to pray to the oil gods either! :lol: Yes, yes, I know. "War is a Racket".] What I was saying is that nothing you posted in this thread isn't common knowledge. You didn't reveal anything new, other than the fact that you're one of those people that think that murdering thousands of innocent people per year is okay, as long as you still get your flat screen TV. Unless I misunderstood you.....? And what's this crap about me saying "9/11 was fishy"? When have I even gone into anything about 9/11? (searches his own posts) Anyways, you sound a bit out of control right now. You apparently don't handle disagreements too well. When you're ready to calm down, I'll be around.
I agree that control of oil supply was the main reason for the invasion. That is why a bit back I posted my support for safe hydraulic fracting of gas in the US. It much lessens our dependence of foreign energy sources and therefore the necessity of military intervention, not to mention how much less of a contribution to global warming gas has as compared to coal.
Yeah Gary, I don't know. It's not just about how much oil we need. It's about how much oil everyone else needs too. And when does that start cutting into our supply. How do we protect our supply. Maybe there is a serious race to become energy independent. Maybe there is a serious race to become free from the chains of oil slavery. But if there is...I'm not seeing any serious signs of it. Just window dressing. Who knows? The increase in natural gas supplies has increased the total world energy supply, which is bringing down the cost of all energy, but more importantly he has lessened the us and the world's need to deal with petty dictators (Saudi Arabia etc.) and therefore the need for large military establishments somewhat.
We invaded Iraq for oil. Elementary. Everyone knows this.
Which is why gas prices are so low. Oh wait... The irony of your post is that the "Blood for Oil" platitude is a conspiracy theory. http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4032
We invaded Iraq for oil. Elementary. Everyone knows this.
Which is why gas prices are so low. Oh wait... The irony of your post is that the "Blood for Oil" platitude is a conspiracy theory. http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4032 The new natural gas supplies are not the only factor determining the price of oil but what do you think the price of oil would be without the increased supply of natural gas? Also I am talking about the world-wide price not just the US.

Even if you take your position, VYAZMA, what I think that you’re not considering is that even the Americans, as a whole, do not take advantage of any privilege to the oil – they are individuals who only use the American flag to appropriate such advantages for themselves.

We invaded Iraq for oil. Elementary. Everyone knows this.
Which is why gas prices are so low. Oh wait... The irony of your post is that the "Blood for Oil" platitude is a conspiracy theory. http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4032 What are you talking about? Yeah gas prices are high! 2 ten year wars.(remember they rationed gas in WWII) Plus an increased demand from the developing countries of the world. Hello? A big increase in demand. I ain't talking about no "blood for oil platitudes" here...whatever the heck that is? You are absolutely disconnected if you think we didn't have strategic interests in mind when we invaded Iraq! Oil being the main strategic interest. Or no, maybe we spent 7-9 years and over 1 Trillion dollars, plus Soldier and civilian blood to help the Iraqis get democracy. We were working just fine with Saddam for decades...why the sudden change of heart? My guess would have to be that Saddam started entertaining other courtiers...higher paying courtiers. There is nothing in my post that is ironic. Unless you think that the majority of wars have been fought for ideals...since forever. Even the Crusades weren't fought over for religion! It's territory and resources. Everytime! Every time!
Even if you take your position, VYAZMA, what I think that you're not considering is that even the Americans, as a whole, do not take advantage of any privilege to the oil -- they are individuals who only use the American flag to appropriate such advantages for themselves.
If I'm understanding your post correctly here, I don't see the conflict? What are you saying? It seems that was exactly what I said.
Cloak-Yes, yes, I know. What I was saying is that nothing you posted in this thread isn't common knowledge. You didn't reveal anything new, other than the fact that you're one of those people that think that murdering thousands of innocent people per year is okay, as long as you still get your flat screen TV. Unless I misunderstood you.....?
No, I don't think it is OK. But it is inevitable. People are trying to keep you in oil anyway they can. And you couldn't imagine what life would be like if that were to stop. I'm serious..maybe you know this. If you do know this, then most of your arguments are hollow. You and I and everyone else are why the Iraq war happened. Until you realize that.... Do you have any idea how many times in one day your life intimately intersects with oil? It could almost be said that every single nano-second it does. Our world runs on oil. By our world I mean...everything you do. All the fun you have. All the food you eat. All the products you buy. All the movements you make.
And what's this crap about me saying "9/11 was fishy"? When have I even gone into anything about 9/11? (searches his own posts)
Yeah, maybe I'm wrong, I'll have to check on that.
Anyways, you sound a bit out of control right now. You apparently don't handle disagreements too well. When you're ready to calm down, I'll be around.
Good point. Touche.

Iraq had nothing to do with oil. The United States never got a drop of Iraq’s oil while there and the Congress would never have voted for the war if it was clearly about oil. Remember that the President isn’t a king. The goal was to turn Iraq into a liberal democracy and then let the Iraqi government auction off its oil to whomever it pleased, which initially it did to non-U.S. companies from countries that were against the invasion. Furthermore, if Iraq was about oil, it would have been very foolish to invade that particular country for oil. There were far easier countries the U.S. could have invaded if it was solely after oil, such as Bahrain or Kuwait.

Cloak-Yes, yes, I know. What I was saying is that nothing you posted in this thread isn't common knowledge. You didn't reveal anything new, other than the fact that you're one of those people that think that murdering thousands of innocent people per year is okay, as long as you still get your flat screen TV. Unless I misunderstood you.....?
No, I don't think it is OK. But it is inevitable. People are trying to keep you in oil anyway they can. And you couldn't imagine what life would be like if that were to stop. I'm serious..maybe you know this. If you do know this, then most of your arguments are hollow. You and I and everyone else are why the Iraq war happened. Until you realize that.... Do you have any idea how many times in one day your life intimately intersects with oil? It could almost be said that every single nano-second it does. Our world runs on oil. By our world I mean...everything you do. All the fun you have. All the food you eat. All the products you buy. All the movements you make.
Well, yes, our entire lives are pretty much saturated with oil. I don't disagree with that. Anybody who doesn't realize that 90% - 100% of all wars have always been about power and/or resources is obviously deluded or in complete denial. But being born into such a system doesn't justify imputing the guilt of those in charge of the system to those who have no say in how its run. You and I didn't choose this system, and we have no part in the decisions that are made to keep such a system alive. In fact, many like me feel that such a system may be responsible for taking us all over the cliff in the near or distant future, due to it's complete lack of economic and environmental sustainability. The reason I speak so urgently (and sometimes unnecessarily offensively....sorry) is that I think our civilization is running out of time to make the necessary changes needed to avert or handle some seriously disastrous environmental events that could be right around the corner. We should have started working on gradual transitional solutions more than half a century ago, yet our "great leaders" continue to shove the rest of us, full steam ahead, into the wonderful future that's ahead. Yes, I do know why millions die around the world, especially in the Middle-East. I'm just saying that it doesn't have to be that way. If I didn't think that a better way was possible, then I would have already shut up, jumped on the imperialistic bandwagon, hung up an American flag outside of my house, and said "screw everyone else". But it's not the only way to survive, and it's not the only way for me to be able to provide my children the lives they deserve. You see, if I was to suddenly discover that just about every luxury that my parents provided me as a child was purchased with money that they acquired by being part of some child prostitution ring, then I would immediately disown them. I would have to, if I was to remain true to myself and my ideals. I think that the biggest and most primary reason that we haven't been able to really implement any serious transition programs is because of corporate interests, and it is those interests that are the major influential factors in our government policies. Do you disagree? (oh, and I'd like to apologize for my passive aggressiveness earlier. I'm sure that it didn't help, as it can be pretty irritating. Sorry.)

Dr. Steven Novella, of SGU fame, has written about conspiracy theories. Below is some of what he says about them. See how much of it matches with the “War for Oil” claim.
Hard-core conspiracy theorists tend to have a cartoon view of the world, one in which all people fall into one of three groups: the conspirators, the crusaders, and the dupes. The conspirators are portrayed as evil and powerful, seeking control for its own sake. They are often granted unimaginable cleverness and resources, and their reach knows no bounds. At the same time, they are ascribed unbelievable stupidity-for how else could their conspiracy be uncovered? The crusaders are the believers themselves. They feel they are a small band of freedom-fighters, an army of light, saving the world from incredible malfeasance. The dupes are everyone else.
But grand conspiracies (and that’s what we’re talking about here) require the cooperation of countless people over long periods of time and across many institutions. This is the first major logical fault with grand conspiracy theories -they tend to collapse under their own weight. The problem is explaining how the conspirators are able to maintain secrecy and control.

Second, conspiracy theorists tend to believe that everything happens for a reason – a logical fallacy known as the argument from final consequences. For example, Bush’s power and popularity benefited from 9/11, therefore he must have perpetrated 9/11.

Conspiracy theorists also make much of what we don’t know. If the quirky details of a complex historical event cannot be explained and documented to an arbitrarily high degree, then there must be a reason for our ignorance. They engage in anomaly hunting – looking for any apparent anomaly and then proclaiming that evidence of a conspiracy. Their unstated premise, however, is that apparent anomalies would not exist without a conspiracy. Therefore the dark hand of a conspiracy must be at work in the shadows. Again, Occam would remind us that complexity naturally leads to inexplicable chaos without the need for a purposeful conspiracy.
The final, and most insidious, problem with conspiracy theories is that they quickly become a closed belief system. Why is there no evidence for a conspiracy? Because the conspirators have hidden all the evidence. Why is there evidence that the conspiracy is wrong? Because the conspirators fabricated and planted that evidence. How could they have done that? Because they have frightening power and reach (which brings us back to the first problem). Therefore, there is no amount or type of evidence that can convince a conspiracy theorist that he’s wrong, which means that his (or her) beliefs are comfortably unhinged from reality.
The alternative, alas, is to live in reality. Reality can be frightening and confusing, with questions that are difficult to answer and problems that are hard to solve. But in the real world, at least there are no all-powerful cabals, controlling us from behind the scenes.

[Emphasis added in all cases above.]
Original can be found here: http://www.theness.com/index.php/conspiracy-theories-out-of-the-matrix/
There are people who didn’t like the Iraq war. Fine. Many of them have perfectly fine and legitimate reasons to oppose it. But to engage in a grand conspiracy theory that it was all about oil is simply whacky and flies in the face of all the evidence (see Brian Dunning’s Skeptoid article linked in my above post for the evidence regarding oil.)

Unless you think that the majority of wars have been fought for ideals...since forever.
Two quick questions. First, since you brought up WWII, why do you think the U.S. went to war with Nazi Germany? The U.S. was never attacked by Germany. The U.S. was pretty much insulated from any real attack by them in that time period. Germany didn't have much oil for the U.S. to take. Why did the U.S. go to war against the Nazis? Second, why do you think the Jihadists of 9/11 attacked the U.S.? Was it for their ideals? Or were they trying to get our oil? Why?

I think think the “Jihadists” died to get their 72 vigrens. Because they are so stupid.

yea, soo stupid that they totally derailed the most powerful nation in the world with some box cutters.
It’s that same disregard that blinded the Bush Administration and allowed them to tempt fate during their pre-9/11 sleepy phase.

Unless you think that the majority of wars have been fought for ideals...since forever.
Two quick questions. First, since you brought up WWII, why do you think the U.S. went to war with Nazi Germany? The U.S. was never attacked by Germany. The U.S. was pretty much insulated from any real attack by them in that time period. Germany didn't have much oil for the U.S. to take. Why did the U.S. go to war against the Nazis? Second, why do you think the Jihadists of 9/11 attacked the U.S.? Was it for their ideals? Or were they trying to get our oil? Why? First, the US went to war with the Nazis because we saw a threat to the order of our territories and resources as expressed through certain allied interests. If we stayed out, what do you think the long term analysts would assume would happen to all of our allied interests in the Middle East and Africa.(actually the whole planet really-considering France And Holland owned much of Asia and Africa. The good parts. This is just to name a few.) Plus, can we agree that if the Nazis had assumed total control over Africa, and Europe and much of the Slavic territories, if not all including Russia. Plus England, all of Scandinavian countries, the Baltic Sea, The Mediterranean Sea, The North Sea, The Atlantic Ocean, The Indian Ocean(with Japan), Most of the good parts of the Pacific Ocean along with Japan..etc etc...Can we agree that that would have presented a completely NEW paradigm for the US's territories and resources? To say nothing of the fact that it was probably assumed once they gained this Global Hegemony that they would turn towards North and South America next. Obviously Pearl Harbor was an excellent way to deal with the Japanese aspect of all that. Even if Pearl Harbor didn't happen, we would have had to get in against the Japanese too eventually. That's why the Japanese attacked us first!(they bungled it, like everything else.) They knew that was coming.(US entering the War.) They and the Germans were going for the big Gambit. The whole show. So if all of that wasn't about territories and resources, I don't know what is. We don't just attack to get resources!! We attack to protect resources we already have. Gosh, you didn't get that from my opening comments in this OP. We had Iraq's oil. We had Iraq's oil for decades. We attacked to protect that oil!! Saddam obviously was going to start talking to other parties about that oil. As far as terrorist attacks. That's not war! Terrorist attacks are most often the extreme expression of ideals.