Thanks, Louise. Sorry for my delayed response (business travel frequently pulls me away for days and weeks on end).
I understand the attraction for theories involving motivations for oil, power and moola, especially among those who are extremely dissatisfied with the President's domestic policies (as I am), but I also see severe problems with such theories:
1) Oil. Physically, the US has plenty of oil for its own needs and we can simply buy oil (not steal it) on the open market. We choose not to risk widespread drilling and exploration on our own turf primarily for environmental reasons (some valid, I think, and some not). For many years we capped the price of domestic oil (but not imported, obviously) with the resulting artificial low fuel prices further discouraging production (and alternative energy sources) while increasing consumption. Artificial supply/demand manipulation always crashes eventually (Econ 101). Invading Iraq may cause Saddam to damage the oil fields causing higher world oil prices (perhaps for years) and further dampen the US economy. Or, without sabotage, it could cause a new "friendly" regime to lower or stabilize oil prices (which would hardly help US domestic oil producers). Either way, not much of a motivation for invading, in my opinion.
2) Power. He's already President of the United States. If, by the word "power," you mean the additional credibility to steer the world towards his public vision of more democratic republics and less tolerance for terrorism and terrorists...well, I wouldn't mind that at all.
3) Moola. He's already a millionaire and pretty well set for life, financially speaking.
Perhaps we're ignoring the elephant in the livingroom: 9/11.
I think it's so obvious many people simply don't want to believe it. Worldwide terrorism, particularly that of radical Islam, is (in my opinion) a real and present danger to the US, all its citizens, and to the civilized world in general. A plausable explanation is that this President is deadly serious about tracking down every terrorist, every terrorist organization, and all those who fund, supply, arm, train, and harbor them. Additionally, Hussein's aggressive behavior and willingness to use the most horrible of weapons (at home and abroad) and his continued violations of arms treaties for 12 years should not be ignored until there is a larger and deadlier version of 9/11.
That's not a popular explanation on this thread but it's still the one that makes the most sense to me--MK-- |
