Your post shows your bias because you assume that we acted solely out of economic interest
Please tell me out of which selfless concern the US army protected the oil ministry and ONLY the oil ministry, while they were asked repeatedly to protect the museum?
If we were really motivated by the dark side, you must admit that it would be easier to steal a few billion in cash than to try to control the oil industry.
Your reasoning is completely wrong.
(1) I never said anything about a "dark side". Self-interest is normal.
(2) US government can PRINT $$$. Why would they want to steal it???
(3) And in any case, what is a few billion next to many hundreds of billion? Again, why exactly was the oil ministry protected in your opinion?
We did very well in the war. Our plan was achieved with historical lack of human casualties on all sides. Do you admit that at all? No, of course not
It was an unnecessary war. I am not going to pat you on the back because your army unnecessarily invaded another country, because it was a "successful" invasion, whatever that means in this context.
I don't believe that it was avoidable
Then, I am sorry to say, it seems there is no reasoning with you, at least on this issue. You read the article I posted where an eye-witness said how one tank was enough. One tank.
Again, if US soldiers could protect the oil ministry, they could protect the museum. I am in awe of your immunity to this simple fact. |
