Why Bush when to Iraq

[Rex_20XD6]

Bush most likely went into Iraq instead of Saudi Arabia or fought a lot harder in Afghanistan because the Saudi’s and Bin laden family have so much money in the U.S. bank that is they where to pull out, the stoke market would crash. I got my facts from Fahrenheit 9/11 and it’s got holes in it’s info, and I know that. But that's my theory, so don’t chew me out for it.

[Rex_20XD6]

Is some on going to reply or something?

[praxis1966]

I'll do you one better. He went into Iraq because of the large investments that the bin Laden and Saudi royal families have made in his and his fathers various business ventures. That, and the Saudis have been quite co-operative both times the U$ went after Iraq and, by extension, their oil supply.

[el bigpig]

not only that, but they are gnerally on good terms with the Saudi royal family. US had terrible relations with Iraq

[Rex_20XD6]

And if they went into Saudi Arabia they oil cost would go up.

[DaCuBaN]

Then what of Venezuela? ;)

[(*]

He went to Iraq because Saddam Hussein is evil, they have WMDs, and he killed 3,000 people on 9/11

[praxis1966]

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2004, 10:20 PM
And if they went into Saudi Arabia they oil cost would go up.
Where have you been? Here in the U$, the price of gas has nearly doubled in the last two years. It's up something like 75% nationally on the average. The increased price of oil is a benefit to the oil companies to which Bush and Cheney are beholden. The word Halliburton comes to mind.

[h&s]

He went to Iraq because Saddam Hussein is evil, they have WMDs, and he killed 3,000 people on 9/11
I hope that's sarcasm!

[monkeydust]

Bush most likely went into Iraq instead of Saudi Arabia or fought a lot harder in Afghanistan because the Saudi’s and Bin laden family have so much money in the U.S. bank that is they where to pull out, the stoke market would crash. I got my facts from Fahrenheit 9/11 and it’s got holes in it’s info, and I know that. But that's my theory, so don’t chew me out for it.

Yes, I suppose.

But this is hardly the only reason why Iraq was the chosen area.

As some have already said, Iraq was notably antagonistic to the U.S. Saddam was openly so, in fact. Iraq was also more commonly considered to be a 'bad' country, thus justification for military action was easier.

Invasion of Saudi Arbia would also have been stratigically more difficult, in my opinion. Let's also not forget the Bush wanted to finish what his Daddy had started.

[Kurai Tsuki]

It's no big revelation that the American government has close ties to Saudi Arabia, and accuses other Arab countries of lacking democratic tendancies while Saudi Arabia one of the most authorotarian countries in the Middle East. Every politically informed Arab knows that. And they didn't have to see Farenheit 9/11 to know it :lol:

But about the facts, the film underwent a very strict factual scruitiny before it was released. So there's nothing wrong with citing it confidently.

[praxis1966]

Originally posted by [email protected] 2 2004, 01:21 PM

Yes, I suppose.

But this is hardly the only reason why Iraq was the chosen area.

As some have already said, Iraq was notably antagonistic to the U.S. Saddam was openly so, in fact. Iraq was also more commonly considered to be a 'bad' country, thus justification for military action was easier.

Invasion of Saudi Arbia would also have been stratigically more difficult, in my opinion. Let's also not forget the Bush wanted to finish what his Daddy had started.
I'm not sure that I would agree that Saudi Arabia would have been a strategically more difficult proposition as there is really no way of knowing. The rest of your assertions I can easily stipulate to.

I would add as a sidenote that this had nothing to do with 9/11 (and no Crescent, I'm not talking to you; I know you were kidding). The fact is that something like half of the current cabinet level officials in the Bu$h administration sent Clinton a letter making the argument for a full scale invasion of Iraq. 9/11 was just a convenient excuse. That said, I did hear on the radio the other day that the only cabinet level official in the Bu$h Whitehouse who isn't a former oil company executive (including Cheney) is Secretary of State Colin Powell.

While oil probably was not the solitary motive for the invasion, I believe it was the primary one.

[(*]

:lol:

Remember when they found a mural on a wall, it showed the 9/11 attacks. Everybody was like "I knew it! Saddam was behind 9/11!"

[DaCuBaN]

I did hear on the radio the other day that the only cabinet level official in the Bu$h Whitehouse who isn't a former oil company executive (including Cheney) is Secretary of State Colin Powell

That would probably explain why he doesn't seem like as much of an arsehole as the rest of them.


While oil probably was not the solitary motive for the invasion, I believe it was the primary one

Oil was the 'carrier wave', so to speak. To my mind, the reasons for this particular Holy Crusade are all encapsulated within.