Reason's for war in Iraq...
Dustin51
Posts: 222
This is a thread to discuss what the real reasons for the Iraq war were and are and how you feel about them.
Does anyone believe we went into Iraq to disarm them because we were afraid they would attack us?
Does anyone think that we went there for humanitarian reasons? Free the people from tyranny and all that…
Are we there to protect financial interests?
If so, then what are the consequences of not protecting those interests?
Assuming the consequences are dire, e.g. China would have a hold on the world market, opec moves further and further from the dollar, our economy collapses…etc etc..just imagine the government believe's the result would be a full economic collapse.
Would you be happier with our government if they were honest about their reasons? (Assuming the haven’t been honest to this point)
Would you still reject the war?
I know I’m making quite a few jumps with my assumptions but I had this debate with a few friends yesterday and came across some interesting answers. I’m curious what the members of this board think.
Does anyone believe we went into Iraq to disarm them because we were afraid they would attack us?
Does anyone think that we went there for humanitarian reasons? Free the people from tyranny and all that…
Are we there to protect financial interests?
If so, then what are the consequences of not protecting those interests?
Assuming the consequences are dire, e.g. China would have a hold on the world market, opec moves further and further from the dollar, our economy collapses…etc etc..just imagine the government believe's the result would be a full economic collapse.
Would you be happier with our government if they were honest about their reasons? (Assuming the haven’t been honest to this point)
Would you still reject the war?
I know I’m making quite a few jumps with my assumptions but I had this debate with a few friends yesterday and came across some interesting answers. I’m curious what the members of this board think.
Be excellent to each other
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
You dont think our reasons were financial at all?
You think it was just to settle a score?
I might agree with that in the sense that it is possible we simply wanted to prove who has the biggest swinging dick on the block...I do not believe it was the only reason though.
By the way...if you could check my grammar I'd appreciate it. Thanks. lol
Then you will understand why...
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
The ONLY reasons for the war in Iraq are selfish, financial reasons. Children are dying of hunger every day in this world and nobody cares, so I think human rights are out of the question..
Do not believe what you are told, Free your mind!!
no problem. i was an english major... i cant turn it off
and no, i truly don't think it was financial. i think that was a perk and made it easy to get some people on board and use them to convince others. but i think the initial drive was solely a muscle-flexing exercise... a cowboy tactic to remind the world who's boss. it didnt work. we just look like a fucking bully.
--Does anyone believe we went into Iraq to disarm them because we were afraid they would attack us?
The American people believed this... because this is what the Bush Administration TOLD the American people.
--Does anyone think that we went there for humanitarian reasons? Free the people from tyranny and all that…
If this were the case... there are more brutal places on the planet than Iraq. Why put Iraq at the top of the list?
So, my answer is NO... we didn't want to save none of those fucking towelheads. If anything... we wanted to NUKE them. Saving them was excuse number Three... after Weapons of Mass Destruction and al Qaeda Terrorist Central didn't pan out. Sort of our own personal 'Plan 9'.
--Are we there to protect financial interests?
We are there to protect the financial interest of multi-natinal corporations whose stocks are sold in our exchanges.
--If so, then what are the consequences of not protecting those interests?
The multi-national corporations will seek the aid of another country.
--Assuming the consequences are dire, e.g. China would have a hold on the world market, opec moves further and further from the dollar, our economy collapses…etc etc..just imagine the government believe's the result would be a full economic collapse.
So, then... if money is what matters... all that other crap about protecting American lives or saving poor Iraqis is bullshit.
And we should have thought about the consequences when we handed out all of the manufacturing jobs to China and helped the rise of a COMMUNIST NATION.
And seriously... so WHAT if China becomes the economic power... we blew it and handed it over to them by beig such dicks. We are heading to becomne the next England. Not such a bad thing.
--Would you be happier with our government if they were honest about their reasons? (Assuming the haven’t been honest to this point)
Yes. And i would be happier if I shit gold bricks... but, neither is gonna happen.
--Would you still reject the war?
Yes. I have rejected it from the start because it is not the right war for us to be fighting.
--I know I’m making quite a few jumps with my assumptions but I had this debate with a few friends yesterday and came across some interesting answers. I’m curious what the members of this board think.
Thank you.
Hail, Hail!!!
I agree with a lot of this. There were I think a bunch of people in the Bush administration who thought Saddam was behind 9/11 from day one. On top of that after the Afghan war started to drag on they realized a slow step-by-step war in the mountains (while it might have worked) wasn't really a good way to show off all those billions of dollars worth of military hardware (since you can't really show your results on TV). Now a "shock and awe" campaign is something you can show every night on TV and people will take notice. Personally I think the concept of overthrowing a brutal dictator is a good one, it is just in this case it was just planned so poorly from the start that it had no chance.
http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=272825
then why were we not informed of that beforehand so we, the people of the united states, could decide whether or not it was something we felt was a good investment of our tax dollars?
would it have mattered? I mean, I don't remember being consulted in the first place.
Congress voted, the president acted. And nobody asked me squat.
for the least they could possibly do
I don't think anybody in Washington was thinking that far ahead. It's known that some intelligence analysts foresaw the sectarian violence and the insurgency, but those predictions were ignored.
http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=272825
Thanks....that made me chuckle...
lol
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
some people laugh when they are confused.
http://forums.pearljam.com/showthread.php?t=272825
700,000 Iraqis killed and 4 million refugees. How messed up is that? GIVE PEACE A CHANCE!!!
p.s.- Hopefully, Barack Obama will be president, and get us out of this mess and unite the country again.
*info about war provided by http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home
can't
The US (well, the Bush/Cheney regime) went to war with Iraq so Bush would be a war-time president during his re-election campaign.
Case.
Closed.
lets remember...we went in because A country who didnt even have war planes supposedly had nuclear capabilities.
astonishing.
I also believe this was a factor.
The whole 'Mission: Accomplished' thing was a Karl Rove designed photo op. The idea they had was to win an easy war, be greeted as liberators, bring the troops to a massive ticker tape parade in New York and a somber rememberance at Ground Zero on September 11, 2004. Imagine the re-election camapign... Bush in a flight suit... 'Mission: Accomplished' in the background. The Democrats could have fielded a Jesus Christ/Michael Jordan ticket and still would have lost in a landslide.
There was a reason why they wanted to rush to war... to get it all over with before the 2004 Election.
The only obstacle that could derail them... REALITY.
Hail, Hail!!!
That's an interesting take on it. If all of that had fallen in place his first term wouldve resembled his fathers. Funny how Bush I had all the pieces in place and loses because he had to renige on a promise to not raise taxes, (read my lips, ya'll remember right?) and Bush II does a horrible job and actually wins relection. Probably has more to do with the competition though. Clinton wouldve slayed Bush II if he couldve run a 3rd time. Anyway, interesting take. Thanks.
damn right they weren't. they were so busy feeding us all bullshit about our impending doom if we didn't go to war NOW that they didn't bother to think anything through.
that's pretty much what i wanted to say but couldn't formulate it in my head. we couldnt find bin laden, dubya's ratings were sagging, re-election coming up and a lame president, they wanted that spike crisis gave them during 9/11, so they pick an easy target all-purpose bad guy we already demolished once figuring it would be easy PR. the only sad thing is most people bought it.
i was 100% on board with afghanistan. the second i heard them start talking about iraq i knew we were about to get fucked.
afghanistan did have ties to international terrorism and the taliban regime was crooked as cheney. i was opposed to the taliban long before 9/11. if you were going to make a visible move to combat terrorism, that was a good place to start. the fact that we had the support of the entire world on that one shows it was a sound decision. we were on the verge of international unity to combat terrorism. also, the afghanis DID have a history of democracy and might have been able to build a successful, stable democracy, which would have made it a successful mission. instead, we abandoned it (like we did to iraq in 91) and ended up with 2 clusterfucks instead of one. we would be out of afghan by now if not for iraq. instead, we're stuck in both and we showed that we killed our credibility by expanding from combating terrorism to international bully.
Exactly, after Al Qaeda moved out of Sudan the Taliban basically asked them if they would like to move their operation to Afghanistan. They offered them things like government offices and cars with government plates in exchange for moving. Seems like state sponsored terrorism to me. It is a damn shame that a huge portion of the US military pulled out since they probably could have done a lot of good, and the Canadians still there could use the support.
Really how so?
You think the state of mind that lead into the war flip flopped at some point? hehe...around what time would that be then?
I 'm thinking more along the lines of Central America and what happened all over the place down there is more the picture, and what has continued to be, and what will continue to be.
same ol same ol...looks just like a tried (tired) and true prescription for (US) imperialism to me. What do you think?
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
my observation is that they cherry picked some intelligence to make a case, there were more far reaching reasons for going into Iraq, which started before 9/11, that with each of their pre invasion reasons being disproved and discounted, they would come up with another catch phrase reason for invasion to keep as much heat off them as they can.
Just look at how our western allies have reacted to the iraq war, or if they were with us for a while they are missing in action now.
just the reactions of other countries governments tells the story.
Stop by:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=14678777351&ref=mf
As to the histroy of afghanistan...the US has supplied tens of thousands of school textbooks to afghan schools, teaching the more radical side of Islam, in an effort to keep the soviets in a quagmire, much like our vietnam. We've also supplied millions in arms, built extensive tunnel networks, all in the name of fighting communism. Basically using afghanistan as a pawn, while literally tens of thousands of innocents lost their lives in the bloody game.
Washington's stated goals and actual goals are never the same. AS long as the markets open up to forieign business their job is done. history has dozens of examples. That's all they need, access to the resources. What type of gov't they have or how free or well treated the people are is almost irrelevent.