Another Iraq Thread (with a POLL)

[UltraQuiet]

I'm really just curious where ATOT really stands. I took these choices from another board and I think they really represent the two schools of thought. Please vote and post your reasoning. Just to be different and what is almost mandatory at the other board please post links, quotes, etc. to substantiate your reasoning.


Answer 1
Bush wants Saddam out because he sees him as a ruthless dictator who has invaded his neighbors, sought genocide against Iraqi Kurds, and is seeking WMD with which to blackmail the west ala North Korea or give to terrorists to destabilize the west with. Unlike North Korea, Saddam can be handled militarily without turning one of our closest allies into smoldering embers, and it's better to act now than to wait until he gets the bomb like NK.

Answer 2
Bush wants Iraq's oil and Saddam is a nice excuse to get to it. If the US lifts the embargo on Iraq, it would reach the world market, but French and Russian oil companies would profit from it. If there's a new US puppet government in place, those deals Saddam has made with the French, Russians, and whoever else are gone, and Bush's oilmen friends reap the profits, repaying him nicely come the 2004 election.

 

[DaveSimmons]

Answer 3
Bush wants war with Iraq at least in part to distract us from domestic problems and to help himself get re-elcted despite the state of the economy and emerging police state.


Though "all of the above" might be an even better answer: Stop the bad guy, get cheap oil and get the approval ratings up.

 

[Moonbeam]

I think he's just saber rattling.

Of course it could be a combination of ingredients, but because I can't handle pdf files I will forever remain in the dark.I thought I had a good link, but it was a pdf file.

 

[hollowman]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
Answer 3
Bush wants war with Iraq at least in part to distract us from domestic problems and to help himself get re-elcted despite the state of the economy and emerging police state.


Though "all of the above" might be an even better answer: Stop the bad guy, get cheap oil and get the approval ratings up.

 

[Electrode]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I think he's just saber rattling.

I wish I could agree with you.

 

[etech]

US 'fine-tunes' plans for post-war Iraq

...
The administration is conscious of the charge - coming from Baghdad and other Arab capitals - that its real aim is to snatch control of Iraq and its oil reserves.

Difficult options

To counter the charge, officials are insisting that Iraqi oil is the property of the Iraqi people - and that the US military would protect the oil fields as a purely short-term measure - for example, to prevent Saddam Hussein setting fire to them.
....

The very fact that the charge is out there and so wide-spread makes it politically impossible for the US to "grab" the oil fields. It does make for an easy mud-throw for the people that would disagree with Pres. Bush solely for the reason that he ain't Gore.

 

[Moonbeam]

Hehe, electrode, I was just reflecting on a possibility. Truth tell, I can't be sure. Saber rattling in this case may in fact be persuasion by certain Senators and Powell to reign in a cowboy, in which case saber rattling can put a pretty face on inept and knee jerk irrationalism. I suspect the latter, but I'm a liberal, so I look at the possibilities. I'm not privy to the data that could tell for sure.

I do think, however, that Bush is doing what he thinks is best for the US. My bigest objection is that he lost the election and shouldn't be President. It's not nice to fool Mother Democracy.

 

[Tab]

I wish I had a opition three. He wants Saddamn Gone, his WMD's gone and the oil in Iraq. I could care less if we do get the oil. The people in Iraq will have much better lives.

 

[FlashG]

I think that the main underlying question is how are we going to deal with future nuclear powers? Are we going to threaten to attack every new member or deal diplomatically with them?

 

[SlowSS]

Bush wants Saddam out because he sees him as a ruthless dictator who has invaded his neighbors, sought genocide against Iraqi Kurds, and is seeking WMD with which to blackmail the west ala North Korea or give to terrorists to destabilize the west with. Unlike North Korea, Saddam can be handled militarily without turning one of our closest allies into smoldering embers, and it's better to act now than to wait until he gets the bomb like NK.

Sounds about right.

 

[acidvoodoo]

uno

 

[Centaur6]

With all honesty, i just don't see Bush wasting billions of dollars to help the Kurds, so i'm gonna have to go with the second option. However, the first option is the reason i support the outsting of Hussein. The way i see it, it doesn't really matter why Bush is doing it, as long as good will come of it.

 

[Czar]

all three options shown up are valid and I mostly agree with all of them

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I'm flattered

 

[JellyBaby]

The very fact that the charge is out there and so wide-spread makes it politically impossible for the US to "grab" the oil fields

The country isn't grabbing Iraq's oil. The end effect will be establishing business opportunities with Western oil interests. It may take a handful of years to accomplish this but there's a very real reason Russia and France are very troubled over any invasion of Iraq.

I just hope when it's all over the price of gas is the only thing we need to worry about.

 

[Hamburgerpimp]

I just bought a truck. Bomb the fvck out of Iraq.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Hamburgerpimp
I just bought a truck. Bomb the fvck out of Iraq.

Best reason so far.

 

[Hamburgerpimp]

I was being sarcastic. But, I did buy a truck.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: JellyBaby

The very fact that the charge is out there and so wide-spread makes it politically impossible for the US to "grab" the oil fields

The country isn't grabbing Iraq's oil. The end effect will be establishing business opportunities with Western oil interests. It may take a handful of years to accomplish this but there's a very real reason Russia and France are very troubled over any invasion of Iraq.

I just hope when it's all over the price of gas is the only thing we need to worry about.

Turkey on the other hand wants to grab some oil fields, or thats what they have been duscussing, who knoews what the US wants

 

[johnjohn320]

Neither. I think it's a mix between the two. I think Saddam is seen as a huge threat and needs to be taken down, but we're going after him now instead of N. Korea because of the oil. It's like, we're taking down Saddam because he's a threat, yes, but the oil is just another nice incentive.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Bumped up to see if anyone has anything substantial to back-up Number 2 with.

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: johnjohn320
Neither. I think it's a mix between the two. I think Saddam is seen as a huge threat and needs to be taken down, but we're going after him now instead of N. Korea because of the oil. It's like, we're taking down Saddam because he's a threat, yes, but the oil is just another nice incentive.

JJ, do you think that it is politcally possible for the US to "grab" the oil fields?

Anyone, explain to me how that would work? Would the US go in and just take them over? Would the US take all of the profits of the oil?

C'mon, I keep seeing people spouting it's "all for the oil" and "cheap oil", well , back it up.

 

[bigredguy]

I read an article somewhere that said the reason we didn't take hussein out the first time was that we have invested millions if not billions on researching him and if we took him out then some other guy would take the reins and who knows what he would do.

 

[hagbard]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
Answer 3
Bush wants war with Iraq at least in part to distract us from domestic problems and to help himself get re-elcted despite the state of the economy and emerging police state.


Though "all of the above" might be an even better answer: Stop the bad guy, get cheap oil and get the approval ratings up.

Okay, I agree with answer #4, but it requires more than a one-liner:

Text

Not that anyone will bother reading it, they haven't so far.

 

[etech]

Originally posted by: hagbard

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
Answer 3
Bush wants war with Iraq at least in part to distract us from domestic problems and to help himself get re-elcted despite the state of the economy and emerging police state.


Though "all of the above" might be an even better answer: Stop the bad guy, get cheap oil and get the approval ratings up.

Okay, I agree with answer #4, but it requires more than a one-liner:

Text

Not that anyone will bother reading it, they haven't so far.

I read it, it's stupid and filled with factual inaccuracies. If that is what you are basing your objections on then I now realize why you are so confused.