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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (159357)	3/21/2005 12:40:54 AM
From: Orcastraiter	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

The argument made to the American people and to the UN was that Saddam was a threat to national security. Powell testified to the UN about hidden WMD, mobile weapons labs and so on. It turns out that none of these existed in Iraq at the time of the war. That the US was not under any threat from Saddam. In fact after 12 years of no fly zones and sanctions Saddam was impotent. Saddam was afraid that if Iran knew how weak he was they would attack him, and was trying to curry favor, once again with the US, while trying to appear strong to his enemies. Powell has since apologized for getting it wrong. Bringing freedom, which you say is Bushspeak for democracy, was never sold to the public, nor to the UN. What was sold was that Saddam had WMD and was a terrorist supporter. After all he was sending money to the families of martyrs in Palestine. We won't talk about the fact that money for the families of martyrs came from every country in the middle east, including Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan...and of course Iraq. Saddam controlled the resources of Iraq. No other entity in Iraq could have made any payment to Palestinian families from Iraq. It's incredible that some how Saddam's support of the Palestinians is parlayed by the Bushies into support of Al Qaeda...and support of 9-11. Even today more than half of Americans think that Saddam was involved in 9-11. And this after both the President and Condaleeza Rice have stated that Saddam was not involved. So the real reason for the war in Iraq was all along to bring democracy...er a...freedom to the Iraqi people. It's the only thing left that might have a ring of truth to it...unless we talk about the reason behind much of the neocon plotting...OIL. I'm sure you'll take offense to such a statement. Certainly we went there to help the Iraqi people get freedom...we didn't go there for their oil. We never went to Rwanda to secure their freedom. We don't go to the Sudan to secure their freedom, and the death toll there is now 4 times the death toll in Rwanda. Welcome to the hotel Darfur. I find it interesting that in Bush's speech which you posted, That the first paragraph doesn't mention freedom or democracy for the Iraqis. The first paragraph frames the real success which was securing the oil fields. Bush boasts that we have nearly achieved air superiority. Hello...we have had air superiority in Iraq for the past 12 years. Not a single sortie was sent up by Saddam 's forces. Amazing that the second paragraph reprimands Saddam for torture. The Bush administration has gone out of their way to find ways to use torture. In Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo and in Afghanistan. This administration has sent folks to foreign countries for a little contract torture. Then one can argue that torture is ok...so long as it's a terrorist that your torturing...but how do you know if they really are terrorists? And how many innocents have been tortured by our country? All in the name of fighting torture and terror! I certainly won't argue that removing Saddam was bad. But I can argue that when we do it we need to do it in the right way. Certainly torture has no place in our efforts. Further, I believe that freedom could have been brought to the Iraqi people with out the bombing and the invasion and the 20,000 collateral deaths and 100,000 wounded and maimed. War may be quicker in removing a dictator. But war never changes the political landscape that lies beneath the evil head. Now that Saddam is gone we still will see struggle for power in Iraq. The Sunni will not kow tow to the Shia. The autonomous Kurds will not be dictated to either. Even with Saddam gone we have infighting, terror and war still going on. As the chart I posted points out...that casualty rate has increased over the two year period. This war is not over. At best we can train Iraqis (Shia I suppose) to defend against the remnants of the Sunni Baathists. Removing Saddam does not open the door to peace. We will see American troops in Iraq for at least a decade. Certainly for the full Bush term. Any wagers? They will be there serving the Shia majority. A buffer to the insurgents (Sunni). But it will be a you scratch my back I'll scratch yours affair. We'll have bases in Iraq, and we will have access to their OIL. Bush cited the main goal of the war was to protect America. After all that's what the military is for. It's not for freeing the people of the world. Most of the world is not free. In the killing fields of Sudan...not one American soldier goes there to bring democracy. And after Iraq, we'll need to free the rest of the middle east...the list is long where democracy has yet to stand. And then off to Africa and Asia. Since you have championed the Neocons here...lets examine the policies of the PNAC. Certainly their policy is to use American power, military power, to secure the middle east. And why the middle east? OIL. The notion of Peak OIL is not some whacko extremist concept. We are running out of oil. $80/bbl is right around the corner...whether we drill ANWR or not. You say the Neocons were watching Islam...they knew that something was brewing. Well christ...why didn't they tell Bush and Rice!?? Rice stated to the 9-11 commission that "Who would have dreamed that someone would use a plane as a missile?" Well she certainly should have been listening to the neocons in the back row. One thing that is clear about the war in Iraq. It was not fought for the sake of freedom, read democracy. That is the biggest load of crap I have heard today. The war was taken to Iraq for one...and only one reason...to secure the second largest oil reserve on the planet. It was sold under the label of "threat of WMD" and "terrorist connections" (to Al Qaeda). I'll believe the crap about democracy when congress starts allocating $80 billion to save the Sudan. Orca