It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What was the real reason for the war in iraq?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 31 2003 @ 07:30 AM
link   
Saddam had little or no links with Al-Qaeda.
Saddam had no WMD.
Saddam was not a threat to USA or Israel.
**BUT** Iraq has OIL
Bush's grandfather,Prescott Bush got his wealth from trading with the Nazi's,and since then the Bush Family has all it's richness and power from Oil.
The first gulf war was to preserve kuwait's oil rigs not to save it's poeple.
The second gulf war was not to liberate iraqi's but to capture it's oil.




posted on Dec, 31 2003 @ 08:01 AM
link   
You're almost right...but not quite. It wasn't to "capture" oil, but to punish and remove a major Opec exporter, who had switched from the Dollar to the Euro. This accomplished two objectives...1. to install a US friendly relationship with whomever ends up leading Iraq, to ensure oil favors to the US, and 2. to install a leadership that will be on the Dollar, vs. the Euro, thus helping the dollar, and help keep the rest of Opec on the Dollar as well...

The bonus objectives were:
1. to establish a staging ground in the heart of the mideast, for any future military action, other than Saudi, which was preferable for pull-out.
2. the liberation of the Iraqi people.
3. the removal of a major funder of anti-US/Isreal terrorism.

[Edited on 31-12-2003 by Gazrok]



posted on Dec, 31 2003 @ 09:56 AM
link   
I totally agree with the Isreali thing.

I think a good portion of it was in support (stupidly) for Isreal


Why do we back Isreal so hard? Is it so hard to say we made a mistake and get out of that trainwreck?



posted on Dec, 31 2003 @ 10:18 AM
link   

Why do we back Isreal so hard? Is it so hard to say we made a mistake and get out of that trainwreck?


Because so many of them are in powerful positions (both business and politics) here, of course....



posted on Dec, 31 2003 @ 10:30 AM
link   



posted on Dec, 31 2003 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bushed


BUSHED is right. It's more about the oil than anything else. I myself can't qutie explain why but I know the oil is the main reason we went and IMO it was a pretty stupid reason.



posted on Jan, 1 2004 @ 12:51 AM
link   
I really don't buy that it was all about oil, myself. Otherwise, the whole oil-for-food program could have been manipulated. Simply put, the US could have approved Iraq's shopping list - but they didn't. (Whereas the UN was approving Mercedes and stuff like that the US didnt even want Iraq buying trucks of any kind with their oil)

Nor do I buy the whole dollar-euro crud: The euro is strong because the dollar is weak. (not because the euro is doing all that well on its own merit). If that were the case I'd say fine! Let Opec switch! THEN, when the dollar resumes it's superiority the US will have even cheaper oil!!!! muahahhahaha


Iraq/ Al-Qaeda ties: the media and the dems and such have put so much stock in the lack of ties between such parties that its no wonder they're not reporting such ties. they simply are ignoring any connection between the two, at all! It's crazy! There are ties! (myself, I think at the very least they were connected by their hatred towards the US - should we have given them the chance to eventually get together - if they allegedly weren't already - to try and destroy us?? no, we should not)



[Edited on 1-1-2004 by Bob88]



posted on Jan, 1 2004 @ 12:56 AM
link   
Gazrok is 100% right and 9/11 was planned as the next pearl harbor to accomplish these goals.



posted on Jan, 1 2004 @ 01:23 AM
link   
yeah.....and I wrote up PNAC also.........



regards
seekerof



posted on Jan, 1 2004 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
yeah.....and I wrote up PNAC also.........



regards
seekerof

I knew it!



posted on Jan, 1 2004 @ 02:43 PM
link   
There's an underground economic war. That's why the dollar is getting weaker even though the economy appears to be getting better. I pretty much believe we went to war to protect the dollar. Saddam was just the first of those that sought to switch to the Euro. You had Chavez in Venezuela almost overthrown right before we went into Iraq. You had Putin of Russia switching right after a meeting with Bush. You have no support for the war in Iraq lead by the nations of the Euro.

Recently, you have the president of Opec complaining about the slipping dollar. They want to jump ship just like all these corporations we are protecting.

The war was supposed to be a show of strength, but it only served to make folk scared of an ever increasing bully. You have the Saudi's seeking wmd now...you have Iran joining up with Europe. We are worse off now than we were before we started the Iraq hunt for wmd lie and the axis of evil lables.



posted on Jan, 1 2004 @ 04:56 PM
link   
This thread would be better placed in the NWO forum, no? Or, maybe the politcial scandal forum, thanks to Saphie's more intellectual contribution.

DarkSide, your refusal to admit that Hussein had connections to terrorism, that he had and used chemical and biological weapons and that he was a menace to the West does not negate that truth, but makes you look ignorant. Again.
The fact that there is nothing more than conspiratorial nonsense regarding War-for-Oil speaks for itself.

Thank you, Saphie, for going in a sensible direction.



posted on Jan, 1 2004 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne

DarkSide, your refusal to admit that Hussein had connections to terrorism,

Shows your ignorance you believe Bush with no proof.
If Saddam had terrorist connections prove it. Do Bush a favor and prove it since the CIA can't.


[Edited on 1-1-2004 by DiRtYDeViL]



posted on Jan, 1 2004 @ 05:01 PM
link   
As the evidence was not from Bush, but from foreign intel, it shows your ignorance, and probably your short attention span and memory problem.



posted on Jan, 1 2004 @ 05:02 PM
link   
Being the information was before the speech you libs always blither on about, I imagine you have no clue about what information I refer.
Go read.



posted on Jan, 1 2004 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
As the evidence was not from Bush, but from foreign intel, it shows your ignorance, and probably your short attention span and memory problem.


But he used it as proof didn't he yes he did in his state of the union. Show me Saddam is a terrorist. Quit dodging it.



posted on Jan, 1 2004 @ 05:08 PM
link   
No. Go learn. I really don't have time to teach you, which is why I've spent less time here. Or have you not noticed the less amount of truth injected into the unbelievable amounts of BS strewn about here? In a few weeks I'll probably have more time, but until then, if you really want to know the truth instead of towing the BS line, go see if you can find it. I doubt that is what you are looking for, though. Most of you can't past your myopic "Bush is the Devil" stupidity to find the truth.



posted on Jan, 1 2004 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
No. Go learn. I really don't have time to teach you, which is why I've spent less time here. Or have you not noticed the less amount of truth injected into the unbelievable amounts of BS strewn about here? In a few weeks I'll probably have more time, but until then, if you really want to know the truth instead of towing the BS line, go see if you can find it. I doubt that is what you are looking for, though. Most of you can't past your myopic "Bush is the Devil" stupidity to find the truth.

To bad you only get your information from Rush Limbaugh and the Fox news network. You spew bull # daily thats already been proven false. At least when I spew # I give articles to back it up.



posted on Jan, 1 2004 @ 05:21 PM
link   
Since you cant back up your bull# Thomas.
www.usatoday.com...
www.thememoryhole.org...

The truth is always a trick to those who live
among lies



posted on Jan, 1 2004 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne

DarkSide, your refusal to admit that Hussein had connections to terrorism,

Saddam paid the family members of Palestinian suicide bombers. BushCo.'s claims were (in the main) that Saddam had ties to Al Qaeda. Anyone with the least bit of understanding regarding Saddam's secular government and that of the supposed religion fanaticism of Al Qaeda would know just how incompatible those two camps are. BushCo.'s claims on that count are laughable.

that he had and used chemical and biological weapons and that he was a menace to the West does not negate that truth, but makes you look ignorant.

Shame on the west for supplying Saddam with those vial weapons. And shame on the U.S. for turning our heads away, knowing full well he was gassing the Iranians. But having said that, let's not forget also that Iran is just as guilty for gassing Iraqi soldiers and civilians.

Again.
The fact that there is nothing more than conspiratorial nonsense regarding War-for-Oil speaks for itself.

Concerning oil.. conspiritorial nonsense? To make such a comment is in itself utter nonsense. It was most definitely about taking charge of the world's second largest oil reserve and staving off any attempt by OPEC to go with the Euro. Not to mention inserting our military into Iraq for the foreseeable future. OPEC will think long and hard about switching their oil currency as long as we're there ready to pounce.

Thank you, Saphie, for going in a sensible direction.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join