Boiling down the *real* reasons for the war against Iraq

[stevietheman]

With a lot of new information springing forward recently, I have been thinking more about the real set of reasons why the nation was lied into attacking and occupying Iraq.

Here's what I think are the real reasons:

1. Looting -- grabbing poorly accounted funds from American taxpayers and Iraqi oil revenue, to pass to Bush and members of his administration, many of their friends, and their favored industries, esp. the military-industrial complex. The "Money for Nothing" article in the American Conservative is very illustrative. I cannot really improve upon the horror stories in that article.
   
   
2. Embarrassment -- Saddam "embarrassed" the United States multiple times and thus he had to go down. This administration came to power wanting to get rid of this guy. And from what we've learned from Scott Ritter, going after Saddam wasn't about WMD's for many years (even going back to Bush 41), but instead was about "regime change" for the sake of it. It was a sense of "we didn't finish the job"; therefore, even if Saddam posed no credible threat (and he didn't), he just had to go.
   
   
3. The Dollar -- Saddam started trading oil with euros (instead of dollars) in November 2000, and the Bush administration didn't want to see a domino effect start with regards to even more oil trading taking place with euros (further deflating the dollar's strength). Note that Iran is starting its oil bourse, also trading in euros, starting next year.
   

I have recently come to the conclusion that the "PNAC thirst for maintaining global power" is really a long-planned political front story that is used by the Bush Crime Syndicate (and their sycophants/protectors) for 1) passing the buck ("blame the neocons, who conned us") and 2) creating a sense amongst the public, via the MSM, that this war wasn't criminal, but rather was spawned from "just a different set of political ideals". Cue in the "criminalization of politics" meme here.

Another political front story, perhaps, is how "God told Bush to invade Iraq". A credible story that the administration denies, this creates yet another smokescreen to cover the true intentions behind this war.

And of course, we all know the long string of rationales for the war stated by Bush before and after the war have turned out to be bogus -- there is hardly any debate on this any longer, even amongst many conservatives.

Of course, I cannot be certain that the reasons I've conjured up are the "real deal", but I want to open up a discussion to see if anyone else has tried to boil down all that we've learned to create a "true picture" of why Bush did all this, holding back the emotional cries of things like "it's all about oil", but instead analyzing the whole affair in a more refined manner.

Any ideas or refinements?

[Starbucks Anarchist]

1. Permanent military bases.

[whirlygigspin]

2. all of the above and mid term elections

Mission accomplished!

and it only cost America 8 Trillion dollars to re-elect them.

--Way to spend that political capitol George!

[Starbucks Anarchist]

7. According to Dick Morris, we should thank Rove for that.

:eyes:

[stevietheman]

5. And the bases would be used to spread the war, so as to continue...

the looting.

I see the bases not as a rationale (or an end in and of themselves), but rather as an instrument to implement their ultimate plans to continue their looting over an extended period of time.

[akarnitz]

9. Permanent bases would stabilize the situation in Saudi Arabia

by our removal of permanent bases in that country. Bases in Iraq might also de-stabilize Syria and Iran. Yeah, the money's all some of the involved want, but there are some power hungry motherfuckers who could care less about the $$.

[begin_within]

3. If there was no oil under Iraq, there would have been no war there.

[Coastie for Truth]

4. I'll go with "The Dollar" and "Embarassment" and add "Peak Oil"

But I call "Embarassment" something else - "Texas Macho Man" and mental illness. I think Bush is a very sick guy - dry drunk, substance abuser, inferiority complex (except he is inferior), and manic-depressive (Justin Frank's book, "Bush on The Couch")

[madeline_con]

6. I'm not so sure taking Saddam out was so much about...

embarrassment or revenge, but a step toward a goal of controlling the world's petroleum supplies.

With the Afghan corridor to the Caspian and greater Asia in the bag, Iraq was a logical next step strategically, to gain permanent access to the Persian gulf.

Israel guarantees the Mediterranian ports will stay acessible. Should Venezuela need an "attitude adjustment", it will ensure no one else in the Americas steps out of line.

It's a Pinky and the Brain scenario. The idea is to have complete control, not just the bucks to buy the oil. For the cost of the war so far, we could have bought a hell of a lot of oil from Saddam. It wouldn't have been so hard to stoke up the spin machine and turn him into a "US Ally".

But the PNAC boys want it all with no restrictions or pesky middle men in the way. The Sauds will always be on the side of the Bush clan; they stand to lose their heads at the hands of their own citizens if they let their guard down.

With India and China vying for their own piece of the pie, the time to act was now.

[Trajan]

8. I think you have formed a decent basis ...

I certainly believe this had been planned by some members of the 'Vast Right Wing Conspiracy' for at least a decade ....

All this war profiteering isnt new though; it is an expected byproduct of war, and to the victors go the spoils ....

I think there is more: the GOP policy of governance, which has been in play since Bush took office, was intended to do as Newt said on the steps of congress in 1994: "Roll back 70 years of New Deal, Great Society institutions" ...

THAT has been their goal all along; to turn back the clocks to 1920, the era of the robber baron, which will diminish the great middle class in the process ....

The 'Privatization' of Social Security, the major anchor of the New Deal policies of FDR, would topple one of the last cornerstones of the New Deal ....

THAT is their true goal .... The Iraq issue is just common war profiteering, resource theft and treasure skimming that has always been associated with war ..... All they needed to do was find a pretext, even if they had to create it ....

[I_Make_Mistakes]

10. They forgot to get rid of the internet, the non Europe and American

populations have excelled under the internet. They get information
we don't get, they will use this info. against us and the as one user name here connotes "thebacklashcometh".

We the people don't necessarily deserve it, but our gov't has sold us out. The technology fields are going by the way, at our stupid gov't's behest.

[sandnsea]

11. reshape the middle east

They've told everybody what it's for, there's web sites about what it's for, I don't know why we don't believe them. Reshape the Middle East to stop terrorism, protect Israel, and secure the oil.

I wish people would stop using Scott Ritter as a resource, he's terrible on WMD. He was quite adament about being allowed to do his job and disarm Iraq in 1998, this is what he said on Sept 3, 1998:

"Iraq today is not disarmed, and remains an ugly threat to its neighbors and to world peace. Those American who think that this is important and that something should be done about it have to be deeply disappointed in our leadership."

"But what I can say is that we have clear evidence that Iraq is retaining prohibited weapons capabilities in the fields of chemical, biological and ballistic- missile delivery systems of a range of greater than 150 kilometers. And if Iraq has undertaken a concerted effort run at the highest levels inside Iraq to retain these capabilities, then I see no reason why they would not exercise the same sort of concealment efforts for their nuclear programs."

"Iraq has not disarmed, and they've lied across the board about not just VX, but once we get to the bottom of the VX issue, we'll find it exposes additional lies, which cause concern for a number weapons issues. When that issue became public in June of 1998, I believe that the administration was forced to endorse the findings that indeed there was weaponized VX in Iraq today"

"We must go forth and find these weapons that Iraq is hiding. And that could go on a very long time, especially given the level of Iraqi obstruction today."

"They're -- Iraq has positioned itself today that once effective inspection regimes have been terminated, Iraq will be able to reconstitute the entirety of its former nuclear, chemical and ballistic missile delivery system capabilities within a period of six months."

http://www.ceip.org/programs/npp/ritter.htm

[indepat]

12. And those and oil, empire and hegemony

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

13. Domestic Politics

Remember, everything was bad news for shrubco at the time the propaganda campaign for war began in earnest. All corporate scandals and bad economy.

Invasion gave a reason for * to be "war prez"

It gave a reason to whip up a big part of the country into a jingoistic, nationalistic fervor

It gave a reason to bully and browbeat "noncompliant" media

It gave a reason to bully the Dem party in general for midterm congressional elections, and then the national, prez election.

* was headed straight for one term palookaville prior to this.

On edit: Now, it will be two term, infamous, palookaville.

[whatever4]

14. I agree with what you say

but, I sum up all those different reasons into one overall reason, which is, that these are war profiteers. They profit in many ways from war, from the weapons to the contracts to the looting of oil to the permanent bases. Lawlessness helps them, and America hating the "enemy" helps them.

They just needed a war, because they profit from it. Ruthlessly simple and impossibly dishonest, and they're more than willing to run over our nation to get it. They'll profit from a war HERE too, if it comes to that. Big money, big business, and none of us matter. We never did, but we all know that.

Going to war with Iraq was a goal as soon as Bush gained office. Any target would have done. Iraq was the easiest, and if one throws 911 in the mix (which not everyone does, either LIHOP or MIHOP aren't universal), and if one believes our government had ANY part, we can realize just HOW bloodthirsty, unethical and dangerous these "people" running our nation really are.

They want money. War facilitates stealing better than anything else, so they started a war they don't ever actually have to "win".

[nolabels]

17. I vote for your explanation, it checks most logical with my notes

I am still trying to figure the angle on 9/11. Most people with half a brain know elements of the U.S government were somehow complicit, but to what degree and intent remains a little of a mystery for me

[ktlyon]

15. possibly to destroy evidence of crimes by Bush the First

Iranian hostages?
arms for hostages?
contras?
invasion of Kuwait?
illegal arms sales?
chemical weapon use?
assassination?
...?
What if Saddam knows something the Bushies want kept secret? They would go to these extremes to cover it up, I think.

[Junkdrawer]

16. China...

China will be the big story of the 21st century.

Multinational corporations have trillions invested in China. China is dependent on foreign oil.

PNAC wants to control China by controlling the oil.

[oblivious]

18. Because it was 'doable'.

A fifth-rate military power. A sure bet. An easy opportunity to show other countries in the mideast as well as Asia who was the boss.

Well, ok, oil too.....

[Coastie for Truth]

19. This is append 19 - so based on OP-18

The consensus appear to be "OIL" - with mental illness, controlling China (by controlling oil), protecting Israel (to protect the Haifa oil pipeline - that was destroyed in 1948 and now exists only on Google and Wikipedia), protecting Saudi Arabia (to, again control the oil spigot) all being facets of oil.

And what has it gotten us - still dependent on overseas sources for over half of our oil, no increase in Corporate Average Fuel Economy since Carter, the Feds joining the Big Three to attack California's emissions laws in Federal Court? We're further behind the 8 ball then when we started.

I wouldn't be surprised to see John Cornyn try to amend the Second Amendment as follows (changes in bold red):

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms as individuals, even if not members of any organized militia, and to own and drive gas guzzlers, shall not be infringed.

[stevietheman]

20. Late Sunday afternoon coffee discussion kick. :) n/t

n/t

[immoderate]

21. Add self aggrandizement.

According to the tenets of psycho-history, a leader gains status commensurate with the number of his own people he is willing to sacrifice. Yes, this can backfire, but the great leaders in history have gotten many of their own people killed.

--IMM

[ok_cpu]

22. I think they just ran out of shit to blow up in Afghanistan

This administration had no idea how to respond to 9-11 but had to look like they were acting with "shock and awe" for political reasons.

They ran out of things to blow up in Afghanistan and I believe they really convinced themselves that Iraq would be a cakewalk. For the sake of the 2004 election, spreading democracy became the new "true" reason and now they (and the rest of the country because of them) are painted in a corner that they cannot possible get out of.