Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stevo
So if the US is so obsessed with iraqi oil, then why did we stop short of taking over Iraq in 1991? were we not so 'dependent' on oil then?
|
No one thought they were a threat to America. They didn't have the ability to attack America in 1991, so if we overturned their government, we would have gotten in serious trouble. It was necessary to fabricate a threat (al Qaeda ties, WMDs) in order for people to allow us to invade and overthrow their government.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by stevo
Yeah, and if you want to go on believing that the whole reason we are in iraq is to establish permanent military bases you are going to be proved wrong when its over. Do you actually think that the bush administration believes that the way to solve the terrorism problem is to build more military bases in the Arab world? Come on. You obviously don't have a mind big enough to understand that by giving people the opportunity to govern themselves and spread freedom, we can overcome terrorism. You probably make me laugh more than I make you laugh.
|
Mind sizes aside, there will be at least two American military instalations in Iraq after our troops officially pull out. We are in Iraq in order to strike fear. Remember "shock and awe"? It's pretty obvious. When we go after another "terrorist state" (based on lies), you will still be saying that we are there for legitimate reasons. Is there any line that America will cross that makes you question their motives?