Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kpete

(71,983 posts)
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 10:39 AM Dec 2011

WHY WERE WE EVER IN IRAQ?

...................

After all these years I still have no idea what it was all about.

Even at the time conservatives would occasionally admit that the WMD rationale was horseshit. It was as if each had their own individual Great Game reason for it. There were as many reasons for the Iraq war as there were supporters of it.

I suppose, ultimately, it came down to blowing up brown people and pissing off liberals. So it was quite a success, really.

http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/

66 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
WHY WERE WE EVER IN IRAQ? (Original Post) kpete Dec 2011 OP
O I L baldguy Dec 2011 #1
You wish! comipinko Dec 2011 #3
PNAC thought of taking out Saddam long before W came on the scene. baldguy Dec 2011 #10
"they " would never have gotton it done comipinko Dec 2011 #17
Yeah they would have. Didn't Cheney divvy up Iraq's oil fields w/Big Oil Guys gateley Dec 2011 #46
Major reason....plus W had personal ones too. W wanted to be WAR President ala John Wayne opihimoimoi Dec 2011 #30
War profiteering. backscatter712 Dec 2011 #34
Exactly right. GoCubsGo Dec 2011 #40
This message was self-deleted by its author newspeak Dec 2011 #64
yep, the all powerful MIC, and musn't forget the military is the largest US consumer of oil nt G_j Dec 2011 #59
Bush had no say in it. n/t Scuba Dec 2011 #48
It all boiled down to the CIC's "daddy issues" comipinko Dec 2011 #2
Because Saddam tried to whack Bush I MicaelS Dec 2011 #4
It was a field test for our new weapons n/t doc03 Dec 2011 #5
Remember the PNAC? It was in their game-plan. shraby Dec 2011 #6
Yes! Wind Dancer Dec 2011 #32
j-bradford's blog makes a good point JustAnotherGen Dec 2011 #7
This message was self-deleted by its author HereSince1628 Dec 2011 #8
Within hours of the attacks, they tried to link Iraq to 9/11. HughBeaumont Dec 2011 #12
well, halliburton who wasn't doing too well newspeak Dec 2011 #31
burn through the treasury so there would be nothing left for rurallib Dec 2011 #9
I think it was created as cover for what SCOTUS did by stopping the count in FL Tippy Dec 2011 #11
Iraq was an existential threat, the fate of all western civilization was at stake.. Fumesucker Dec 2011 #13
Saddam tried to kill my Daddy. sarcasmo Dec 2011 #14
Insane profits for military contractors. Initech Dec 2011 #15
and, we have a winner!!! MH1 Dec 2011 #52
I like to refer to this as "the unwinnable war for obscene profit." Initech Dec 2011 #62
To finish Poppy's war. lpbk2713 Dec 2011 #16
Because this map was on Dick Cheney's desk in Feb. & March 2001 Botany Dec 2011 #18
To set up permanent miltary bases and control the region. tjwash Dec 2011 #19
Your comment surprised me. Control-Z Dec 2011 #49
Saddam was a bad, bad, man who made decisions that hurt his own people, don't you know. theophilus Dec 2011 #20
Much the same reason they want to attack Iran cpwm17 Dec 2011 #21
Iran will their Stalingrad. bikebloke Dec 2011 #22
Just like Vietnam and Afghanistan. For politcians to win votes by displaying their "toughness". Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2011 #23
Control the terrain, protect corporate profit, kill humans resistant to the idea (nt) T S Justly Dec 2011 #24
Because we elected/allowed bush and cheney into office bhikkhu Dec 2011 #25
The simple answer is greed and power.... OwnedByFerrets Dec 2011 #26
Because the Supreme Court appointed GHW Bush's kid to the presidency. n/t lumberjack_jeff Dec 2011 #27
I have to agree with the posters who point to PNAC. LiberalAndProud Dec 2011 #28
Corporate greed, and the further consolidation of 1% corporate control over the planet: Zorra Dec 2011 #29
EXCELLENT post Zorra!!!! BeHereNow Dec 2011 #39
"Biggest heist ever perpetuated on the planet." Or maybe the second... Zorra Dec 2011 #44
If you look at the end result dipsydoodle Dec 2011 #33
For the money. Orsino Dec 2011 #35
don't you remember? they had wmds. eom ellenfl Dec 2011 #36
And why did the President, who said Iraq was a "dumb" war keep supporting sad sally Dec 2011 #37
He actually got us out on a time table very similar to the one he ran on. JoePhilly Dec 2011 #53
george h. and george w. spanone Dec 2011 #38
So "W" could go his Daddy one better...... frebrd Dec 2011 #41
Too many libruls told 'em not to, so they decided they had to! kenny blankenship Dec 2011 #42
they never tell me anything unionworks Dec 2011 #43
oil sasha031 Dec 2011 #45
$$$ That's always the answer as to why we do anything. $$$. nt gateley Dec 2011 #47
Besides oil and daddy issues we must not forget profiteering. jwirr Dec 2011 #50
Read the FOIA request and results concerning Cheney's mmonk Dec 2011 #51
PNAC / Cheney's Energy Plan / Replay of the easy Gulf War #1 for Daddy ... JoePhilly Dec 2011 #54
Lots of dumb reasons. But the biggest outcome Jakes Progress Dec 2011 #55
You've (not personally) have had your eyes on Iraq for years and years MichaelMcGuire Dec 2011 #56
Oil and whatever other resources we could steal. Also to make sure oil continued to be denominated truth2power Dec 2011 #57
because bushco lied our way into it? is this a rhetorical question? dionysus Dec 2011 #58
Because Al Qaeda successfully attacked us under Bush/Cheney gulliver Dec 2011 #60
little boots even stated that he didn't care about OBL newspeak Dec 2011 #66
War = Profit SHRED Dec 2011 #61
purple fingers for freedom Enrique Dec 2011 #63
shhhhhhhhh! DeathToTheOil Dec 2011 #65
 

baldguy

(36,649 posts)
10. PNAC thought of taking out Saddam long before W came on the scene.
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 10:58 AM
Dec 2011

An American empire in the Middle East has been a tenet of RW ideology since the First Gulf War at least. And the purpose of that empire would be to control the world oil supply.

The reason the today's GOP is sniping at Obama for the withdrawal from Iraq is because it makes their dream of an oil empire that much less plausible, not because of W's freudian "daddy issues".

gateley

(62,683 posts)
46. Yeah they would have. Didn't Cheney divvy up Iraq's oil fields w/Big Oil Guys
Sat Dec 17, 2011, 03:22 AM
Dec 2011

before we even knew HOW/WHY we were going in?

I bet they were absolutely gleeful when 9/11 occurred - that gave them the excuse to feed the masses.

I'm sure Bush was all for payback, but not sure how they would have pulled it off w/o 9/11.

opihimoimoi

(52,426 posts)
30. Major reason....plus W had personal ones too. W wanted to be WAR President ala John Wayne
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 01:41 PM
Dec 2011

What a loss for the Nation... 4500 priceless lives and 1 trillion...add 2more trillion all is done with soldiers injuries rehab

worse President in all of Human History...most evil..

backscatter712

(26,355 posts)
34. War profiteering.
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 02:04 PM
Dec 2011

Maybe it was partially the grudge W had against Saddam, but mostly it was Cheney, Rumsfeld & co. that used the war to line their pockets and their cronies'.

GoCubsGo

(32,079 posts)
40. Exactly right.
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 06:36 PM
Dec 2011

We could have bought that oil for much less than it cost us to go to war. The Iraq war was nothing but a raid on our treasury by the MIC.

Response to GoCubsGo (Reply #40)

 

comipinko

(541 posts)
2. It all boiled down to the CIC's "daddy issues"
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 10:42 AM
Dec 2011

Yup, >4000 Americans died because * felt he needed to prove himself to his daddy. That is all.

shraby

(21,946 posts)
6. Remember the PNAC? It was in their game-plan.
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 10:48 AM
Dec 2011

Attack the least able to defend themselves, then move on to other middle East countries. Make them all "Democratic" at the point of a gun.

JustAnotherGen

(31,810 posts)
7. j-bradford's blog makes a good point
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 10:50 AM
Dec 2011

With the quote you have. . .

But remember the declaration of principles between Iraq and the US? Back in 2007? Snapshot from NPR's site:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18358334


I've always thought that it was to have a permanent U.S. base in Iraq. I think when I was watching No End In Sight a few years back - I also got it was to spend a lot of freaking money to build and obnoxious over the top U.S. Embassy in Iraq.


Some people voted for Bush, the Supreme Court had to basically declare him President due to hanging chads and sneaky behavior by the Republicans in Florida, some more people voted for Bush in 2004 (but look at Ohio before we say he won) . . . but here I am in my populist progressive la la land having to pay for what those idiots deliberately and maliciously broke for a permanent US base, funneling money to Haliburton and the company formerly known as Blackwater, Oil (though I paid $3.09 for gas on Sunday), etc. etc. and so on and so forth.

Response to kpete (Original post)

newspeak

(4,847 posts)
31. well, halliburton who wasn't doing too well
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 01:54 PM
Dec 2011

has financially recovered since our fabricated war. The whole "war on terror" BS has done nothing for the american people, either. Especially, when it comes to our civil liberties. If they wanted to take out those responsible, it would have been focused hits; not warring with the populace, especially in Iraq.

And the PNAC's supposed objective of making ME countries democratic, is a BS joke. Any dictator will do if they play the corporate puppet. Any democratically elected leader who cares more about his/her people than global corporate interest usually gets ousted or killed.

It's unfortunate people didn't heed what little boots said before he was selected. He thought his daddy would have been reelected if he was in war. If daddy could have prolonged iraq or started another little war, he could be the second term war president. And, look how well it worked out for little boots.

What's really sick is they use us- our money, our lives, for their own agenda.

Tippy

(4,610 posts)
11. I think it was created as cover for what SCOTUS did by stopping the count in FL
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 11:22 AM
Dec 2011

Bush, Cheney and the SCOTUS hate's America, Americans, Liberals the list goes on and on...

Fumesucker

(45,851 posts)
13. Iraq was an existential threat, the fate of all western civilization was at stake..
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 11:37 AM
Dec 2011

If we didn't stop the Islamobaathifascicommiedicatership over there we would have been fighting them over here.

Everybody knows this.

lpbk2713

(42,753 posts)
16. To finish Poppy's war.
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 11:46 AM
Dec 2011



And then to award Billion$ in emergency no-bid contracts to Halliburton and other favored BushCo contractors.



Botany

(70,489 posts)
18. Because this map was on Dick Cheney's desk in Feb. & March 2001
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 11:54 AM
Dec 2011


@ the same time he was meeting w/ his energy task force. Sec. of Treasury (Fired) wrote that in his book


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/09/60minutes/main592330.shtml

"And that came up at this first meeting, says O'Neill, who adds that the discussion of Iraq continued at the next National Security Council meeting two days later.

He got briefing materials under this cover sheet. "There are memos. One of them marked, secret, says, 'Plan for post-Saddam Iraq,'" adds Suskind, who says that they discussed an occupation of Iraq in January and February of 2001.

Based on his interviews with O'Neill and several other officials at the meetings, Suskind writes that the planning envisioned peacekeeping troops, war crimes tribunals, and even divvying up Iraq's oil wealth."

tjwash

(8,219 posts)
19. To set up permanent miltary bases and control the region.
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 11:55 AM
Dec 2011

Now they have their puppet government in place, and their eyes are now set to invade Iran.

The worst part is, the mother fuckers haven't even changed their rhetoric. I guess just swapping the "Q" with an "N" is easier for them.

I'm expecting Joe Biden to do a press conference with a little vial of "yellow cake uranium" going into Iran soon.

Control-Z

(15,682 posts)
49. Your comment surprised me.
Sat Dec 17, 2011, 11:59 AM
Dec 2011

"I'm expecting Joe Biden to do a press conference with a little vial of "yellow cake uranium" going into Iran soon. "

Would you elaborate?

theophilus

(3,750 posts)
20. Saddam was a bad, bad, man who made decisions that hurt his own people, don't you know.
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 11:59 AM
Dec 2011

We swept in there and turned their frowns upside down while making life even better for the
greatly blessed American people. Win, win....at the very least. No? (There is some sarcasm hidden in this post. Try to find it.)

 

cpwm17

(3,829 posts)
21. Much the same reason they want to attack Iran
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 12:10 PM
Dec 2011

To allow their (neocons') favorite country in the Middle East to domantate its neighborhood.

Plus many politicians need enemies. Immediately after the Soviet Union failed, the US started its 20 year war against Iraq. They couldn't stand not having the Soviets as an enemy. So they fabricated some stupid incubator baby lie, and off to war we went. All over some local conflict between Iraq and Kuwait.

OwnedByFerrets

(9,054 posts)
26. The simple answer is greed and power....
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 12:36 PM
Dec 2011

of course, its much more complex.
Cheney wanted Iraq because they had, or were about to Nationalize their oil. We cant have that....might cost the Oil Giants some profits.
Monkeyboy (bush, in case you have forgotten) wanted Iraq to FIX what daddy didnt finish.

LiberalAndProud

(12,799 posts)
28. I have to agree with the posters who point to PNAC.
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 12:47 PM
Dec 2011

They had an agenda, and with Junior Cheney at the helm and Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz in the engine room, there was nothing to stop them.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

In particular, we need
to:
ESTABLISH FOUR CORE MISSIONS for U.S. military forces:
• defend the American homeland;
• fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars;
• perform the “constabulary” duties associated with shaping the security environment in
critical regions;
• transform U.S. forces to exploit the “revolution in military affairs;”

Zorra

(27,670 posts)
29. Corporate greed, and the further consolidation of 1% corporate control over the planet:
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 01:04 PM
Dec 2011

The entire Iraq debacle is the result of the 1% using the government they stole in 2000 and subsequent control of the military of the US as private world police force to conquer Iraq and make Iraq available for their business interests to steal Iraq's resources, subjugate the Iraqi people and place them fully under their control, profit through the complete privatization of the resources and the factors and means of production in and of Iraq, create a mass market for their goods within Iraq itself, and ultimately make Iraq into a safe strategic environment from which to run business operations and protect their interests in the region. There are various other related reasons as well, all concerns of the 1%.

OCCUPY!

First, a few looks at the Royal Corporate Castle, the US Embassy in Iraq, the HQ fortress that we built and paid for so that wealthy private interests could have a bulletproof base of operations from which to conduct business.

The Mega-Bunker of Baghdad
The new American Embassy in Baghdad will be the largest, least welcoming, and most lavish embassy in the world: a $600 million massively fortified compound with 619 blast-resistant apartments and a food court fit for a shopping mall.


Massive U.S. Embassy In Iraq Will Expand Further As Soldiers Leave 09/16/11

WASHINGTON -- American combat troops in Iraq may be heading to the exits -- or not -- but the U.S. government's enormously expensive intervention there is hardly coming to an end.
snip---
As part of that increase, the State Department will double its complement of security contractors -- fielding a private army of over 5,000 to guard the embassy and other diplomatic outposts and protect personnel as they travel beyond the fortifications, the official said. Another 3,000 armed guards will protect Office of Security Cooperation personnel, who are responsible for sales and training related to an estimated $13 billion in pending U.S. arms sales, including tanks, squadrons of attack helicopters and 36 F-16s.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/16/us-embassy-iraq-state-department-plan_n_965945.html

Dennis Kucinich:

"As I have said for five years, this war is about oil. The Bush Administration desires private control of Iraqi oil, but we have no right to force Iraq to give up their oil. We have no right to set preconditions for Iraq which lead Iraq to giving up control of their oil. The Constitution of Iraq designates that the oil of Iraq is the property of all Iraqi people," Kucinich said.

http://www.alternet.org/world/63036/

Oil Workers’ Union Confronts Occupation and Privatization

Organising over 23,000 workers in the Iraq’s southern oil and gas industries, the General Union of Oil Employees (GUOE) is struggling against both the US/UK occupation and the corporate-led privatisation of Iraq’s industry.

Position on Privatisation ‘The privatisation of the oil and industrial sectors is the objective of all in the Iraqi state/government. We will stand firm against this imperialist plan that would hand over Iraq’s wealth to international capitalism such that the deprived Iraqi people would not benefit from it...we are taking this path for the sake of Iraq’s glory even if it costs us our lives. Iraqis are capable of managing the their companies and their investments by themselves’

http://www.internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article870

Iraq to Privatize Electricity
An Iraqi electricity law hasn't been made public.
September 10, 2007 |

Two of Iraq's many needs right now are more electricity and more investment. A law being drafted could satisfy both, paving the way for foreign and domestic private companies to build power plants, a step toward fully privatizing the electricity sector.

"It should be short coming," a senior U.S. official working in Baghdad on Iraq's electricity sector told United Press International on condition of anonymity on the sidelines of an Iraq energy conference.

http://www.alternet.org/world/62128/

Any questions? It's not rocket science.

BeHereNow

(17,162 posts)
39. EXCELLENT post Zorra!!!!
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 06:34 PM
Dec 2011

The completion of setting everything in place for
the multi national corporate masters of the world
to control the universe is complete.

THAT is the only reason our troops have been withdrawn.
They are no longer needed there.
And we will continue to foot the bill for the embassy
while our troops return to poverty and neglect.
Biggest heist ever perpetuated on the planet.

BHN

Zorra

(27,670 posts)
44. "Biggest heist ever perpetuated on the planet." Or maybe the second...
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 07:41 PM
Dec 2011

they stole the United States in the election of 2000.

Orsino

(37,428 posts)
35. For the money.
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 02:06 PM
Dec 2011

See who enriched himself by our invasion, conquest and occupation, and you'll know why.

sad sally

(2,627 posts)
37. And why did the President, who said Iraq was a "dumb" war keep supporting
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 06:28 PM
Dec 2011

it from inauguration day Jan 20, 2009 until December 15, 2011 - so an additional 255 Americans could die for his war? Yes, I said his war. It's okay to blame the previous administration up to a point, but supposedly the Bush/Cheney administration was no longer in power after 1/20/09.

Remember the hearings with antiwar veterans back in May of 2008? How could a campaigning Senator Obama who rightly called this a "dumb" war hear this yet continue it for three additional years?
#####

Nine veterans of the Iraq war told their stories before members of Congress and a packed gallery. One of the veterans had also served in Afghanistan. About 40 veterans were in the audience.

The veterans spoke about extremely lax rules of engagement handed down by commanding officers, which they said virtually guaranteed atrocities would be committed, and which in turn created a violent backlash among Iraqi people and a continued cycle of violence.

Former U.S. Army Capt. Luis Carlos Montalvan served directly under Gen. David Petraeus in 2005 and 2006.

"We have beaten our drum to try to raise the issue of the dereliction of duty committed by a number of generals who have been promoted and promoted again and continue to perpetuate the lies [that] paint a rosy picture of the situation in Iraq," he said.

JoePhilly

(27,787 posts)
53. He actually got us out on a time table very similar to the one he ran on.
Sat Dec 17, 2011, 12:22 PM
Dec 2011

Reducing from 140,000 to about 40,000 in 19 months (he ran on 16 months).

The rest, he said, would remain in non-combat roles, and exit after training the Iraqis, in a staged withdraw.

You might recall that as a candidate, he said .... "We must be as careful getting out as we were careless getting in".

And then, not only did he say this as a candidate, almost immediately after winning the election his transition team published this statement:

"Barack Obama and Joe Biden believe we must be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in. Immediately upon taking office, Obama will give his Secretary of Defense and military commanders a new mission in Iraq: ending the war. The removal of our troops will be responsible and phased, directed by military commanders on the ground and done in consultation with the Iraqi government. Military experts believe we can safely redeploy combat brigades from Iraq at a pace of 1 to 2 brigades a month -- which would remove all of them in 16 months. That would be the summer of 2010 -- more than 7 years after the war began.

Under the Obama-Biden plan, a residual force will remain in Iraq and in the region to conduct targeted counter-terrorism missions against al Qaeda in Iraq and protect American diplomatic and civilian personnel. They will not build permanent bases in Iraq, but will continue efforts to train and support the Iraqi security forces as long as Iraqi leaders move toward political reconciliation and away from sectarianism."


http://change.gov/agenda/iraq_agenda/

Bottom line ... anyone who acts confused about what Obama's Iraq exit plan was, clearly was not paying attention.

spanone

(135,816 posts)
38. george h. and george w.
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 06:29 PM
Dec 2011

actually, it was because saddam hussein flew his private airplanes into the twin towers and escaped unscathed back

to iraq. we had to go after him or he would buy more planes and fly them over here again...oh, his sons flew some of

the planes too. oh, and he had nuclear weapons that could eliminate the world too.



kenny blankenship

(15,689 posts)
42. Too many libruls told 'em not to, so they decided they had to!
Fri Dec 16, 2011, 07:36 PM
Dec 2011

No, but really there were a confluence of multiple actors and multiple reasons - all of them evil and most of them incredibly stupid and reckless. Every single reason given on this page probably played its part, from the macro-causes like the desire to control access to the ME oil patch, all the way to the micro-motives of petty vengeance and vainglory. It wasn't just Bush and Cheney. It wasn't just Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld. If Hitler had been the only one who wanted to conquer the world and to punish perceived, historical enemies of Germany, the Second World War would never have happened. There was an underlying sickness waiting to erupt into an epidemic.

Some elements of the DC establishment smelled MONEY in war spending. Some wanted to eliminate a country on Israel's Enemies List. Some players saw a chance to capture a major petroleum supplying nation, and turn it into a US protectorate, and thus into a "mole" for us inside of OPEC. Some wanted to demonstrate to the world that the US was still the global actor that could kick in your front door, take your stuff, and rape your wife and daughter right in front of you before blowing your brains out - and therefore a New Rome to be obeyed and paid off with tribute. Some wanted to make sure OPEC nations would see what can happen to you if you start taking Euros in payment for your oil instead of US dollars. Some wanted to permanently overturn the entire framework of international law regulating the use of military force, that was established at the end of WWII, which had elevated the UN and international consensus above the fiat of empires and hegemons, paving the way for the end of colonialism and serving as a buffer and referee between vying preeminent powers. Some saw a perfect opportunity to create a war atmosphere in the United States to beat down all dissension in domestic politics and to cast support for the young soldiers at war in Iraq as support for the President's election, and refusal to support the President and his reelection as betrayal of our young warriors laying down their lives for our freedom.
It wasn't just the Shrub that had a hard on for slaughtering Iraqis. War fever gripped almost all of the visible government - and presumably it gripped all of the shadow government which pulls the strings on the puppets you see in the White House and Congress. One whole political party was brought together in joyous unanimity by the prospect of using war fever as a weapon against the other one. The other party, as is its wont, cravenly split between those defensively "taking it off the table" and going along with war on one hand, and those attempt to cash on the other. A courageous minority said NO. Their warnings were ignored and they were smeared as giving aid and comfort to the enemy. But whichever party or branch of government they stood in, most of the factions and actors involved in the rush to war were probably motivated by more than one of the above ideas and goals. Given the power of the American system of government to concentrate pompous idiots and remorseless assholes into one place, to elevate the bad over the good, it is fair to say that never was there a more foolish and more unjustified war that was also so inevitable.

mmonk

(52,589 posts)
51. Read the FOIA request and results concerning Cheney's
Sat Dec 17, 2011, 12:06 PM
Dec 2011

Energy Task Force and read also read Bremer's Orders. You will get the whole picture.

JoePhilly

(27,787 posts)
54. PNAC / Cheney's Energy Plan / Replay of the easy Gulf War #1 for Daddy ...
Sat Dec 17, 2011, 12:26 PM
Dec 2011

but with a different ending ... and ending in which we drive straight into Baghdad and take Saddam out in minutes.

The Trifecta of neocon wet dreams ...

Jakes Progress

(11,122 posts)
55. Lots of dumb reasons. But the biggest outcome
Sat Dec 17, 2011, 12:30 PM
Dec 2011

has been a huge recruitment program for terrorists. bushco made the world a much less safe place.

For the idiots who claim we needed to corral Saddam, we could have bought him off for less than a quarter of what we spent. Without the dead bodies.

 

MichaelMcGuire

(1,684 posts)
56. You've (not personally) have had your eyes on Iraq for years and years
Sat Dec 17, 2011, 01:04 PM
Dec 2011

It wasn't for WMD although it was used to justify the illegal war
Nor was it for Human rights cos for years. Human rights were at there worst when you did nothing, and in fact during Regans time helped Saddam kill Kurds.


Read
War, Aggression and State Crime
A Criminological Analysis of the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq
by Ronald C. Kramer and Raymond J. Michalowski

http://bjc.oxfordjournals.org/content/45/4/446.short

truth2power

(8,219 posts)
57. Oil and whatever other resources we could steal. Also to make sure oil continued to be denominated
Sat Dec 17, 2011, 01:34 PM
Dec 2011

in dollars.

Saddam was going off the reservation.

Gaddafi likewise.

dionysus

(26,467 posts)
58. because bushco lied our way into it? is this a rhetorical question?
Sat Dec 17, 2011, 01:50 PM
Dec 2011

i think cheney wanted dough and shrubby wanted to one up his daddy

gulliver

(13,180 posts)
60. Because Al Qaeda successfully attacked us under Bush/Cheney
Sat Dec 17, 2011, 02:00 PM
Dec 2011

They needed to get back their man credentials, so they pushed the biggest war button they thought they could get away with. America wanted someone hit, so Bush and his Republicans substituted Saddam for Bin Laden, the guy they let escape.

Bush's personal psychology played into it too. He reasoned backwards. Since presidents can lead a country into war, then leading a country into war makes someone a president. And Cheney and his pal Rumsfeld calling Bush Mr. President all the time made him feel great. Really, really great.

Rove liked it too, because it gave him something to run on in the 2002 midterms.

The wealthy liked it, because it empowered their friends the Republicans to turn off the alarm switches that kept the economy safe.

newspeak

(4,847 posts)
66. little boots even stated that he didn't care about OBL
Sat Dec 17, 2011, 09:17 PM
Dec 2011

he already got his agenda. Let's face it, we, the american people, get to pay for the PNAC grand greedy thieving scheme; but we do not profit from these wars, the corporations do, the wealthy do, and those on WS. We pay with our live and money and they reap the profits. Until, like the damn vampires they are, they've drained us dry.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»WHY WERE WE EVER IN IRAQ?