Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bacchus_ii who wrote (62386)	12/19/2002 4:34:22 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Have you consider that US only want to grab oil field in the southern zone of IRAQ You mean, just seize them and declare them American property forever? That seems very unlikely. As for buying the oil from Iraq, the US is already Saddam's biggest customer. We don't need to go to war for oil, there's plenty of it on the market already. Dick Cheney's friends in the oil business would rather, on the whole, that the price stay up than drop with an improved Iraqi supply of oil. The war isn't for oil, short-term. That argument just doesn't stand up to examination. Long-term, it is at least partly for oil, inasmuch that it is due to oil that we cannot afford to yield hegemony of the Persian Gulf to Saddam. However, this is only part of the reason, and would be unlikely to be sufficient if 9/11 hadn't happened. Needing to do something about the f--ked up Arab Middle East before more terrorist catastrophes get exported is also a reason for war.