1
   

George W. Bush et al real reasons for going to war with Iraq

 
 
Reply Sat 13 Aug, 2005 09:53 am
George W. Bush et al real reasons for going to war with Iraq.

I will repeat and expand what I've said before (in a not very scholarly organized manner, I'm afraid. I wish I was as good at this as our Setanta.)

I've come to believe that the real reason Bush et al was determined to invade Iraq is not very complicated, but the real reason was politically incorrect, making it impossible to be truthful with the American people and the world.

When we invaded Iraq the first time to liberate Kuwait, Saudi Arabia's royal family allowed US troops to enter the Kingdom to pursue the war led by Bush senior. This inflamed Osama bin Laden and other Muslims in Saudi Arabia and throughout the Arab world. The war was won and Kuwait was liberated. Some US troops in Saudi Arabia were sent home, but many remained on "temporary" bases that the US built.

Later, as bin Laden began his campaign to overthrow the Saudi royal family with strong support from the non-royal population, the Saudi royals put pressure on George W. Bush to remove all US troops from the Kingdom, Bush had to find another place to relocate our troops and to build bases. Why? There was fear that the pro-west faction of the Saudi royal family might not prevail. Bush had to act to ease the pressure on them. Why? To prevent Saudi oil from falling into bin Laden's hands if he was successful in overthrowing the Saudi royals who did not support his ideology.

Other than Kuwait, which had allowed limited US presence in their land (it would have been hard to refuse the US after being liberated) there were few countries in the region that would tolerate a US troop presence. Iraq was a sitting duck when Bush was looking for a country in which to build bases to protect US and other Western oil interests. We were already controlling large areas of Iraq. Iraqi president Saddam Hussein et al was a very bad man and the world would cheer his elimination.

Bush et al had to mask his real purpose and created several versions of why we should invade Iraq: WMDs, terrorism, liberation of the Iraqi people, spreading democracy, etc. None of which had anything to do with Bush et al goals. To get US bases in the regions to protect access and control of oil. That was something the British could also support given their long history of such actions.

The US is now completing fourteen bases in Iraq with a little time and money left over to restore Iraq. Do you really believe the US will abandon these bases after the Iraqi government has taken pseudo control of their country? Don't hold your breath. The US has a pattern of remaining on their bases around the world for a long, long time.

Several goals were achieved by Bush plans. It got US troops out of Saudi Arabia and bought the pro-west branch of the royal family time to fight their internal terrorists to save their control, and to take baby steps toward reform that would benefit their citizens.

It allowed fourteen bases in Iraq as a barrier to aggression by Iran in support of the Iraqi Shiite population. It preserved western control of Iraq's oil in the face of increasing Irani militancy. Without Bush's action, both Saudi and Iraq oil access was threatened.

It allowed semi-independence by Iraqi Kurds, which eased the tension with Turkey. Turkey, a country trying to modernize, wanted to join the EU and Kurd conflict would have made their goal difficult if not impossible.

Unfortunately, Bush's short-term goals to protect US and western oil interests have sewn the seeds of long-term conflict with great risk to the US. The conflict has only begun. In the meantime, Bush et al has done nothing to reduce US dependence on foreign oil. That doesn't only mean Middle East oil, but oil-rich countries in other parts of the world. South America and Asia comes to mind.

Sorry this is so rambling, I hope it makes sense.

I just found a site that seems to have the same conclusion as mine. which I haven't read yet, but it is much better documented and written:
http://www.mydd.com/story/2005/6/21/11741/6199

Time-line of first Iraq war Desert Storm:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/gulf/cron/

Time-line of US Afghan Taliban War
http://www.warchronicle.com/terrorwar/news/timeline.htm

Time-Line of second Iraq war Enduring Freedom:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 687 • Replies: 6
No top replies

 
dupre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Aug, 2005 10:00 am
Yes, I agree, it was always about controlling the oil, and making sure it was traded in Amercian dollars, and not Euro-dollars, too.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Aug, 2005 12:26 pm
I completely agree. And even with a tank of gas costing over $125.00 for the Escalades, Hummers, Suburbans, etc., we're not doing anything to reduce our need for oil, just bitching about the cost.
0 Replies
 
Green Witch
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Aug, 2005 02:18 pm
I think Bush started the war just so he could dress up as a soldier and go for a ride on an aircraft carrier. You guys are assuming he might have given the war idea some deep thought.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Aug, 2005 10:09 am
BBB
Bush then had very little knowledge regarding US foreign policy and other areas of the world and it's cultures---except a little about the world oil market, with he learned from his father. Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld did understand oil politics. Bush has always relied on his father's friends to pave the way for him and to fix his blunders.

Part of his problem is that he is an MBA. Leadership experts contend that business leaders don't make good government leaders because they try to run things like a business. And like CEOs, the decisions they make nearly always favor business over the interests of the citizens. In today's environment, CEOs tend to think short term rather than long term. Governing a country is not like running a business. They are two different worlds. One political and one bottom line. The twain shall never meet.

BBB
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Aug, 2005 10:19 am
budh never intended to do anything to reduce our dependence on foreign oil...this war was about the transfer of profits to bushco.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 14 Aug, 2005 11:50 am
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » George W. Bush et al real reasons for going to war with Iraq
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 09/29/2024 at 09:37:13