It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Need Help w/ Oil/Iraq conspiracies

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 29 2005 @ 01:45 PM
Hello, my name is Jay and I'm doing a persuasive essay based on the fact that the government, trying to not venture into political parties and such, was wrong by sending troops into Iraq and the reason (conspiracies) behind it all. If anyone could at least point me in the right direction, that'd be great. Thanks.

posted on Sep, 29 2005 @ 01:59 PM
Here's a thread I posted more than a year ago about Iraq's use of the 'Oil Weapon':

Saddam's 'Oil Weapon'

You can read through the PDF that was written in March of 2001.

You may also want to seach on topics about Iraq's switch to pricing oil in Euros that was reversed as soon as the coalition took control of Iraq.

[edit on 29-9-2005 by AceOfBase]

posted on Sep, 29 2005 @ 02:08 PM
Unfortunately I don't have time to read the full report, but thank you.

I wanted to ask though, why were we bombing Iraq in February 2001? I didn't know we were at war prior to 9/11.

I was wondering more about why we went into Iraq instead of Afganistan, where known 9/11 terrorists were. I mean, we found no WMD's and I've heard that Bush entered Iraq for the supposed 100 billion (approx.) barrels of "underground" oil. And also to stop Iraq from invading Saudia Arabia and thus controlling their 260 billion barrels and the majority of the world oil market.

Any thoughts on that?

posted on Sep, 29 2005 @ 02:36 PM
Not sure if you've been living underneath a rock but we went into Afghanistan. We ousted the Taliban and reinstalled the rightful king, after destroying all the terrorist training camps. Now we are dealing with small pockets of resistance hopping between the Afghan and Pakistan border.

And you can believe one of two things about Iraq. The liberal point of view that Bush is satan and we went into to steal Iraqi oil and appoint a puppet government to do our will. There also is no terrorist in Iraq only freedom fighters who are protecting their country. This view has little substance behind it since Bush never had to convince any country of Saddams WMDs since they all thought they knew he had them. Saddam also violated 15 UN resolutions in the 15 years he agreed to them. Also the left view doesn't hold into account that our Congress voted for this war and it wasn't only the cause of one President, democrats and republicans voted yes.

Or you can take the normal point of view and believe that the entire world thought Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and posed a serious risk to US national security through either an attack on us or giving weapons to terrorists. After EVERYBODY's governments were proven wrong that Saddam either got rid of his weapons in the 6 month time period we gave him before we attacked, or he never had them and willingfully destroyed them all. After eliminating the threat from Saddams dictatorship we also decided to let the Iraqi people vote for a new government that they each voted for with a popular vote. Thus stabilizing eventually an area and creating a friendly environment for us in the future. I stress future.

posted on Sep, 29 2005 @ 02:43 PM

Originally posted by Flamingrubberducky
I wanted to ask though, why were we bombing Iraq in February 2001? I didn't know we were at war prior to 9/11.

They claim that anti aircraft fire, targeted at US and British planes patrolling the 'no fly' zone, was being directed from within Baghdad so they decided to launch airstrikes. It was not the last time they bombed them that year.

Bush seemed set to step up the bombing against Iraq even before the September 11 attacks.

Here's a CNN article on the bombing:

CNN February 16, 2001

And a BBC article on the Arab reaction to the bombing:
BBC Feb 17 2001

And here's a DoD briefing:

Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Gregory Newbold, director of operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the purpose of the mission was to “degrade and disrupt” the Iraqi air defense infrastructure. Over the past two months, he added, the Iraqis have become more accurate in radar-targeting American and British planes patrolling the Southern No-Fly Zone.

“The attack was made in defense and response” to an increased Iraqi threat against American and British aviators, Newbold said. No coalition planes, he added, crossed the 33rd Parallel, the northern border of Operation Southern Watch. An assessment of damage caused by the strike is underway, he said.

Here's another strike in August of 2001:

U.S., British Planes Attack Iraqi Military Sites

About 20 coalition strike aircraft were involved in the strikes, near An Numaniyah, about 70 miles southeast of Baghdad, and against a mobile early warning radar system and surface-to-air missile site near An Nasiriyah, about 170 miles southeast of Baghdad, DoD spokesperson Army Lt. Col. Steve Campbell said.

I think Bush was just softening up Iraq in preparation for an invasion.

[edit on 29-9-2005 by AceOfBase]

top topics

log in