Originally posted by Texas Aggie
Blade,
Ok I will also end this right here and we can argue elswhere on the finer points of foreign policy. This is all about gas prices.
The national average price of gasoline (per gallon) in 1985 was $1.30. From 1985 to 2005 we have had a national inflation rate of 80.75%. If you have not budgeted for gas in this day and age then go buy a bicycle. Funny how it is OK for everything else to inflate, but placing the blame on Bush for high gas prices is typical alligator talk.
The support for the Mujahideen in Afghanistan was essential to "œcontainment." As opposed to sending U.S. forces into Afghanistan in the 1980´s, the administration supplied the Mujahideen with advisors, weapons and financing to expel the Soviets. This is an example of the Truman Doctrine at use (political response to communist aggression). The direct application of the Truman Doctrine in Afghanistan contributed to the bankruptcy of the Soviet Union and the demise of the Cold War. The Truman Doctrine allowed U.S. intervention (covert or overt operations) to enforce a containment policy via CIA, financing, military and special operations abroad. Support for Bid Laden in the 1980s has no relevance to the case. Hence "œapples & oranges." Two different times, two different scenarios, two distinctly different combatants.
The U.S. became more involved in the Iran/Iraq war (1980-1988) after the Iranian revolution. Both Iran and Iraq began to attack neutral tankers in the gulf and we started protecting our own flag carriers. The Iranians continued to mine the gulf and one of our frigates was damaged by a mine. In response we bombed multiple Iranian oil platforms as well as destroyed two Iranian warships.
At the time, Saddam was the "œlesser of two evils" and we provided Iraq with both biological and chemical technology (as well as precursors to nuke technology). U.S. and western support for Iraq continued all the way until Saddam invaded Kuwait. Now we had to deal with a separate issue (hence "œapples and oranges).
The U.S. was well aware of what Saddam had been supplied with by western nations. We knew his capabilities as well as his duel-use technology (civil and military use). The Ba´ath party and Saddam wanted much more. They couldn´t have what they wanted from Iran, so they invaded Kuwait.
U.S. and western interests were now affected and Saddam turned on his original helpers. New animal, new time, new combatant (hence apples and oranges). The only bearing this has on the Iraq war is our knowledge of his capabilities and technology. We are fighting against some of our own outdated manufactured weaponry and we know what WMD technology he had. Believe it or not, not all of his manufactured chemical weapons were used against Iran, nor disposed of, after kicked out of Kuwait).
Your assertion that we invaded Iraq was so that Saddam could not sell his resource in Euros as opposed to the U.S. is a great point and I believe is in fact very true. Two of the many credible reasons for invading Iraq involved oil. These are:
1. Control over the resource itself
2. Preservation of the U.S. dollar as the world's reserve currency.
Lets just focus on oil for the moment (since this is the sticky point of this whole Iraq thing).
Our buddy Saddam controlled a country with an estimated 1/4th of the world´s oil production. Iraq alone is estimated to contain at least 60% of the world´s reserves (upon continued exploration). Iraq is #2 in capacity to Saudi. We are the largest net importer of the resource (imports of oil were projected to be 70% of the domestic demand by 2025).
Our invasion of Iraq gives us direct control over their oil fields. The idea now is to pump out their oil as much as possible in order to compete with the OPEC oil-pricing gougers. Direct control over Iraq´s oil fields will improve/guarantee future supplies to the U.S. and U.K. All the previous exploration contracts with China, France, Russia, Indonesia and India are voided. What a fantastic strategic benefit from the invasion (a reward to the U.S. & U.K., so to speak for our valiant bloodshed). Control over the oil is a form of international power projection (another great benefit of invading Iraq).
The U.S. and U.K. military presence in Iraq has many, many roles. Just one of these roles is to provide oil field, drilling & piping protection from the foreign insurgency (mainly mercenaries and jihadist from North Africa, Iran, Syria and Saudi).
The euro thing is an excellent point as well. In the late 1990´s Iran made the change. Subsequently in early 2000 Saddam followed the idea. Naturally Bush was going to categorize this as bad (and it is bad... bad for us). This was just one (not the only reason) why the Bush administration developed the Axis of Evil. Notice how the rest of all the OPEC countries did not make the change.
Without a doubt, the oil and the U.S. dollar were two of the many reasons to invade Iraq (we reap tremendous benefits from the spilt blood). With that said, they are not the only two reasons, there are many more in this justified war. The oil and dollar preservation are really just added benefits (or entitlements of the cost for the regime change).
The fact that Saddam needed to be taken out is without question. Containment of Saddam was attempted (but he was openly defiant). The mere fact that Saddam, and Saddam alone, initiated two wars in the region during the past twenty years as evidence that he is "œnot aggressive" is like saying Germany was not aggressive prior to 1945. Look at how many lampshades and soap bars the Nazis were able to make out of those they hated. Bill Clinton, on three separate occasions came very close to taking out Saddam. Instead he attempted to please the Islamic world via U.S. military intervention in the former Yugoslavia.
Clinton´s administration did absolutely nothing to combat the ever growing Anti-Americanism fervor in the middle-east region. The boldness escalated and attacks from Iraq on U.S. pilots continued daily. Islamic extremist were building a rapidly growing army of non-combatants in Sudan and Afghanistan to commit the murder of U.S. citizens. The Bush Whitehouse was tired of "œswatting flies." A major overhaul was needed post 9/11, hence the doctrine of preemptive strike. You are either for us or against us. If you are against us, then it sucks to be you. Don´t even let us think you are up to no good.... because you might be wiped out of existence. Talk about advancing the Kingdom. Protection of this nation is a major advancement of the Kingdom. Who else is going to do it?.... Europe? Asia?
Your right Blade, the spread of democracy is in fact benign (but it will be a great benefit if it holds). Who really cares anyway? I don´t. Initially the regime change will be a democracy because that is our will and that is our mode of government. Would you like for us to set them up as little socialists or communists?... I know, let´s make them Nazis since most of them are all Jew haters anyway.
With a democracy, the people may very well choose to be reigned over by an Islamic republic... that´s not our problem as long as the established republic behaves. This is not really what the people over there want anyway. Even the young people in Iran are sick of the Mullahs (we may see internal change from Tehran within the next twenty years). Go read up on it and stop listening to your professors.
For the short term, we are not necessarily there to stop terrorists but to kill as many as possible. Iraq as a strategic battlefield was ideal for encouraging young like-minded jihadist and mercenaries to come to the killing fields. Killing the jihadist is the idea, not stopping them (the more that come over to Iraq, the better.). It´s like a spider waiting for its prey to come to the web. It´s a strategic plan thought out brilliantly by our war-planers. Bring the young jihadist to Iraq with hopes they wont logistically and operationally mobilize in the rugged battlefield of Afghanistan. You can even see how hard it is to get Bin laden and some of his lieutenants out of Afghanistan (although they are all probably in Iran).
As far as "œGod given right...." The Iraqi people are very happy air power has not decimated all their towns and villages while destroying insurgents. Like I said before, this is a war being fought under the rules of political correctness. We unfortunately sacrifice our troops in order to protect (and limit) the number of civilian casualties. It could be much, much worse. If you look at the numbers Blade, you will see that the insurgency is killing far more civilians than UK & US forces. At any rate, civilian casualties are a repercussion of proximity to the battle. Feel fortunate this is not occurring in Kirkland, Washington. Since when is the life of an Iraqi civilian or combatant worth equal to or more than a U.S. soldier? Although our western philosophy towards the sanctity of life is valued, a U.S. combatant´s life is a higher priority than those scurrying about the battlefield.
God will advance His Kingdom as fit. I´m sorry you view our actions as inhumane. I didn´t know we had the "œhate America crowd" on this forum. Western values are generally regulated by a code. Inhumane is getting your head sawed off with a large bread knife and having the video sent to your spouse. Give me a break about being inhumane.
Alternative fuel methods.... ha! Who´s going to fund that now Blade?... you? Texas (the big oil state) tried with the super-conducting super-collider south of Dallas Fort Worth. This was a huge facility promoting the research of atomic dissection as well as nuclear fusion as an alternative source. Government funding got axed with the Clinton White House. The fact of the matter is oil is relatively inexpensive and there is plenty of it for now as well as projected into the future. Alternative fuel research is not a demand of the American taxpayer (research and development is not what the majority are willing to pay for).
If you are going to blame anybody, blame the far left-wing nut-jobs for the gas prices. After all, they are the ones who forced the mandatory environmental controls on the energy corporations. All their wacko, environmental disaster scares and save the whale campaigns have made a fantastic influence. Their actions are now coming to fruition via government regulation. I don´t think California has had a new refinery since 1977. Who wants such an abomination in their backyard?.... nobody (but they want all the benefits).
You also have 4.5 billion Chinese coming a little out from under the clutches of poverty-stricken communism. You think oil and gas prices are high now? Just wait until the Chinese markets make more of a demand for the resource. Look at their massive industrialization over the past ten years alone. They are actually building cars now. Look out.
The Iraq war is completely justified. Oil is just a benefit and entitlement for the sacrifice made. Bush and Blair will go down in history for their brilliant forethought.
Gas prices are just fine. If you can't budget for it, scale back on your standard of living with everything else.
