There are problem with attacking saudis. First of all, who do you attack there ?
The regime. Same thing that was done in Iraq. Remove the existing dictatorship, and replace it with a democratically elected government.
Their govt is already siding with Bush.
Not fighting Bush and siding with his "vision" of the Middle East (freedom, tolerance) are not the same thing. There is zero freedom in Saudi.
Attacking iraq and getting Saddam out of power is very tangible for claiming victory. This would have been the case if we had attacked pakistan, since Musharraf was already helping us.
What are you talking about?
Iran may have been a better target (if we had to pick!). Khatami is very pro-democracy and has a popular support and it would have been a lot easier replacing Khomeini with Khatami than the situation in Iraq. They could claim to be invade iran to spread democracy in the middle east and also surround Bin Laden in Afganistan. it would put more pressure on Saddam (and maybe there was a chance he would change his stance with the US after seeing Iran succumb).
It would be better to influence the situation in Iran by supporting the Iranians that already don't like their own government. There are plenty.
But, I think the problem there is that there is no oil in Iran.
Uhmmmm, yes there is.
I dont think its a bad strategy to go after Iraq with Oil in mind (in the partial mask of 9/11). Control of oil wells in Iraq (or a US friendly govt there) could give us hugh leverage in improving our economy. An extra $200-$300 per month from cheap oil would do wonders to consumer confidence and potentially the economy.
And this has what to do with Saudi Arabia (which has more oil)?
However, as we saw, it all fell apart, primarily because it was viewed as an illegitimate war by many and made it worse by attacks on oil pipelines in Iraq, contribution to increase in oil price, among other factors.
That's not why it "all fell apart". If you recall, after Saddam's regime ran away in the night, there was a good ~6 months of relative calm. During this time, the Bush administration failed to execute its plan (if there was one) which would lead to a democratic, free Iraq. Iraq didn't just "fall apart", it was poorly managed (by us), and then "fell apart".
Not that i agree with the thinking - I would rather invest in R&D to find other sources of energy. but I can see the thinking behind attacking iraq.
Well, this (its all about oil) is your thinking. I buy into Bush's "promotion of freedom throughout the world" ideas, I just want a better guy in charge to promote it. Not someone who only got C's in college, takes as much vacation as possible, and confuses pig headedness with smarts. |
