What's the war in Iraq really about?
447450
Depending on who you listen to, there are several reasons. I shall attempt to run them down & provide a brief explanation of each, and state my own opinion at the end.\n\n1. Oil. The US needs a source of oil, so we invaded Iraq to get it.\n2. Big Business - The US needed a way to boost the profit lines of big business, and war is the best way to do it.\n3. Freedom - We needed to free the Iraqi's from Saddam's thumb.\n4. WMD's - Saddam had WMD's, he refused to let the UN make inspections, and it's too risky to let Saddam have WMD's.\n5. New Base Location - Iraq makes a great place to project power from in terms of the US military, it is adjacent to the Gulf, and provides ways to reinforce Turkey, as well as keep Iran in check.\n6. Violation of Gulf War cease-fire agreement - Iraq violated the cease-fire agreement of the 1st gulf war, so this war is simply a conclusion of the last war.\n7. Bush's daddy - Saddam tried to kill Bush Sr., so Bush Jr is seeking revenge.\n8. Terrorism - Saddam was conspiring with Osama, so the US had to intervene.\n\nAnd my opinion:\nBush Jr. was obsessed with Iraq, and decided long ago that he was going to end Saddam's rule. He found a reason, Saddam didn't back down, and now we're in Iraq.\n\nHope this helps as a general overview.
156573
First, your question is flawed by assuming the war is for oil.\n\nSecond, I have done two tours in Iraq. The vast majority of Iraqis love Americans. The kids love us and want to shake our hands. The adults love us and regularly invite us to dinner and special occasions. They love us when we build schools. They love us when we build roads. They love us when we rid villages of insurgents.\n\nDon't believe what the liberal media is spinning. They have an agenda just like you.
455302
Well mochita, I believe that we have a war on our hands. As we have painfully come to learn is that one of the greatest weapons to use in a war against an opposing country is to attack its economy, and further to destabilize the fabric of its society.\nThese concerns for international security are the prime motives for the war in Iraq.\nIf we may only try to remember that Iraq's, or rather Saddam Hussein's intentions when he decided to invade Kuwait was for the reason of controlling the export and price of oil through its seaports.\nAlso a main reason for Saddam's decision is Kuwaits geographical location from where Saddam intended to intercept any trade that would issue through this waterway, and I believe it is the mouth of the Red Sea; however, if I am in error please advise me.\nIn my opinion the crisis that our economy is causing for our country are tactics of multiplier effects.\nWe have to conserve our trade routes and partners and this has already cost us billions.\nAdd to that the loss of human life of our loved ones cannot be ignored.\nI could go on forever laying out the reasons for the cause of this war and why my approval of such a war; I however am a much older and more experienced person than many of our citizens and who has learned to try to see and not to only look.\nDo not become angry or spiteful because we are at war. Just try to keep up with as much reliable information that you can and thusly continue to learn under a good shade.  Jose
472915
Yes, it's a war.  You really want to know how and why it began?  Okay, here's a history lesson:\n Many people say it was President Bush who started this war, or that he's continuing his father's work. What started Desert Storm? Iraq invaded Kuwait, a U.S. ally. Kuwait in turn begged the UN for some help in eradicating the threat. The U.S. answered the call. When we pulled out, it was under the condition that Hussein would submit to occasional inspections to be sure that he did not have nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons capabilities. For a little over a decade, we were officially at a stasis. Unofficially though, we were firing on Iraq the whole time. Most of it was retaliation, for Iraqi approved attacks on Americans, or for the mass genocide we were well aware of. Some of it was to rid Iraq of Hussein, for both horrific acts. \nThen September 11th happened, and our policy had to change. The CIA (and other InterPol agencies that I can't recall right now) began receiving intelligence reports of suspicious activity in the Middle East, namely in Iraq. As a result, Hussein was warned that the UN needed to inspect for WMD's. He refused to let them in, and he threatened to retaliate if they tried. Before I continue, why would he do that? Think about it. Moving on. President Bush gave Hussein an ultimatum: "Let them in, or we attack!" Hussein said, yeah right, believe it when I see it. President Bush said, okay, if that's the way you want it...and he went to Congress and asked for their approval to attack Iraq. Once Congress was given the evidence, they voted with an overwhelming majority to go ahead with the attack. Then Bush went to the UN, and asked for their unity in order to rid the world of what was deemed a huge threat. Of course, they refused, all except Great Britain.\nSix weeks after the first inspection was refused, we attacked. SIX WEEKS. If Saddam had something to hide, is six weeks long enough to do so?\nGoing back just a little. The attack on Iraq had already been approved by the Clinton administration. Let me repeat that: ALREADY APPROVED, before Bush. President Bush asking Congress for approval on something they had already passed was only a formality, which he did not have to do.\nOkay, so what's the current situation in Iraq? No one knows, except those that are there. Again, NO ONE KNOWS!  I am a military spouse, so we have friends that are there now, and who have already served in the past couple of years. Some say it's awful, others say we're doing good. How do the Iraqis feel? Well, how many voted in their election? Their first REAL election in over twenty years. If the Iraqis were truly against us, wouldn't they be attacking U.S. soldiers? Not the insurgents, but regular Iraqi citizens?  Wouldn't more be aiding the insurgents? The fact that Iraqis are turning in the insurgents, saving many lives, says something doesn't it? \nOkay, as for the claim that this war is all about oil, it's half-right. Yes, it really is about oil...but not in the way that the people who make that claim think. I've had reports from people in Iraq that Saddam lived in opulence you can't even imagine. Gold and marble and ivory everywhere, 20 room palaces (note, I said PALACES, plural. He had several.)...meanwhile, down the road, maybe a mile away, there was a ten person family living in a one room shack. In absolute and total squalor. The U.S.'s homeless live a lot better, trust me. Hussein was starving his own people, making them go without electricity...and using the money from the oil to build his palaces. Yeah, that's fair. Sure. So we go in, and we seize the oil factories to turn over to the emerging Iraqi government. The Army is working to rebuild schools that have been damaged (many were damaged WAY before the U.S. occupied the country), repairing power lines, restoring clean drinking water...\nSo there you go.  Now you know.  I don't beli
746245
The true terrorists are our very own government.  Iraq had nothing to do with this war, if anyone would take the time to think about it.
548112
Everyone here is wrong except you oh asker of the question.\n\nYou are correct;\nIt is not about oil.\nIt is not about WMD's\nIt is not about regime change\nIt is not about democracy\nIt is not about helping the people of Iraq\nIt is not about avenging Daddy's war\n\nIt is about establishing a Military presence in the Mid-East.  Because of 12 years of sanctions, Iraq was the weekest country in the mid-east with enough of a history to warrant invasion.\n\nThe U.S. has already established 3 Super-Bases with billions of cubic feet of concrete already poured and thousands of civilians and Military stationed on them.\n\nThese bases already have all the luxuries of home including Burger Kings, McDonalds, Pizza Huts, and movie theaters.\n\nWe now have a launching point for future operations in Iran and Syria as well as a semi-permanent residence in the middle east.\n\nIn the last ten years we have greatly reduced our 50 year Military presence in Europe, primarily Germany.\n\nYou know the Snickers slogan? "Not going anywhere for awhile"\n\nIraq is the new Germany...
683694
I think you asked your question wrong,it should be "what are we fighiting for in iraq?" ---we are fighting for oil supply in iraq,this is the primal reason.the second reason is to secure the area (middle east) for isreal.
828050
Dont believe everything you read or hear. The war in Iraq is not \nabout terror. It was about replacing Saddam Hussains Gov.,\nwhich has been done. Terrorism will never cease, because folks \ndont want us telling their countries how to live their lives, no more \nthan we want them telling us. Time for us to come home.
1177005
The war is obviously not about oil. The left only chooses to portray the war that way because they think they can more easily capture the attention and support of the American population as a whole using an easy-to-understand subject. By proclaiming to the people that the war is all about oil and backing their argument up with un-researched facts, the vast majority who cannot think for themselves are easily swayed (this of course, is why the vast majority of liberals cannot think for themselves). \n\nAnd of course, when an unpatriotic soldier says that the war MUST be about oil because the first thing the troops did was head for the oil fields, this soldier must be absolutely brainless. The soldier does not realize that, 1) the borders are completely covered in oil fields and the country could not have been invaded without passing through them at some point, and 2) this action was taken to prevent what happened last time (e.g. the oil fields being set on fire, causing a massive loss of oil and resulting in negative health effects in a wide area).\n\nAlso, the liberals need to take some time to sit down and think logically. Oil prices in the United States have been on a constant rise since before the war started. If the U.S.'s purpose in invading Iraq was to gain a monopoly on the oil market, then reserves would be greater and prices would be lower. Don't try to argue this fact with stupid liberal logic, the fact of the matter is, you're wrong and all of this is elementary.\n\nThe war, obviously, began as an attempt to strike back at terrorism and to secure the safety of the U.S. and its allies after the events of 9/11. Liberals can make biased, unintelligent statements such as "Saddam didn't crash the planes into the twin towers" or "The ones we are fighting are just citizens defending their country", but people who make such statements are completely wrong in several aspects. Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda, the planners and executers of the attacks, had/have strong ties in Iraq. Saddam, although he may not have been directly involved, was guilty of harboring terrorists and committing acts of terrorism himself (mass murder to name one).\n\nAs a result of invading Iraq, many terrorist connections have been broken and leaders of terrorist organizations have been captured. This is fact, not biased speculation. Saddam's regime, which was guilty of many terrorism-based acts, has been eliminated for the most part, and Iraq's people are much safer. The remaining organized terrorism is still fighting, and the U.S. is fighting back hard. Many previously-deprived citizens of Iraq now have access to food, water, medicine, and transportation. Over 25 million people have literally been rescued by the noble actions of the United States, actions that perplexingly divide the opinions of the nation. Liberals need to realize that the war may be costly and that many of the reasons originally given for its initiation were unsupported by fact, but that more good has come out of the war than bad. Liberals whose beliefs are so heavily anchored in human rights and the greater good should have no problems accepting these facts, and should keep their fat mouths shut for once in history.\n\nNone of these opinions and facts discussed are biased, simply logical. I'm not asking liberals to become republicans, just to look logically at the war in general and to see which side really is biased and unsupported by fact. If you can't see the logic in the war, then just don't say anything at all, and stop trying to treat this war like another Vietnam.\n\nThe salvation of 25 million innocent people has been gained at the price of between 2 and 3 thousand lives of U.S. soldiers. Yes, their lives were important, but personally I think that's a really good deal. Think about it.
763225
the current situation in Iraq
975782
The way the war is going in Iraq
1130526
no, it is not. \n\nthe congress did not declare war just the president, so not it is not an actual war...\n\nI hate Bush!
974553
This was a massive plunder operation under the guise of patriotism misplaced.  It is otherwise known as the big lie.  Iraq was ugly for many, but peaceful.  Now Iraq is a violent shambles,directly due to the intervention of GW Bush.  If there were no oil there, do you think we would be there?  Not a chance.
633681
Because making them free is not what Iraq is about.\n\nStep back and look at the reasons that W went in... WMDs and and Alqaida link. Both have proven to be lies by W so we would start a war there.\n\nIt's all about the OIL and giving huge rebuilding contracts to W's cronies. Why do you think the contracts were given out in secret without bids? Because it never was about freedom, or WMDs it was always about oil and wealth.\n\nBush could care less about all the soldiers dying and Iraqi's dying or all the money that's being spent. It's not his money. He is wealthy and getting wealthier along with his cronies and that's all that matters to them. And we've been falling for it, or at least 29% of us.
1113475
It is a term to describe George Bush's war on Iraq. He has created a culture of death. 2500 of ours and 10's of thousands of Iraqi have died in this stupid war.
1123313
what i think is interesting is the war.  It's been awhile since I've read the book, but "we've always been at war with Eurasia"  then it suddenly turns to "we've always been at war with Indoasia(or whatever it was called, like I said it's been awhile).\n\nany-hoot, this reminds me of the war in Afghanistan....we were at war there, then all of a sudden we were in a war in Iraq.  it was like we were always at war in Iraq.  \n\n"Afghanistan?  no, we've always been in Iraq"
1098151
the war in Iraq is a pre-emptive strike