Quote:
Originally Posted by Penn
Are you both; Guy & Pete, implying that you agree that the invasion of Iraq was a fabricated national security issue?
|
Sir, is it possible that Iraq was (and, perhaps, is) a very real national security issue - just not the precise issue that we were told about?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Penn
What do you say to the complete disregard to the Powell/Weinberg doctrine concerning a exiting strategy and the use of overwhelming force. Rumsfield, Weinberg & Co are responsible, as the well respected General Zinni stated: gross negligence on a strategic level that cost an untold amount of lives.
|
Might it be that we have no intention of withdrawing? Furthermore, could it be that we dare not withdraw?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Penn
It will be interesting to see how history treats these people....but is not of some interest that the four Big Oil companies that were once involved in Iraq are now receiving NO BID contracts to operate there again, oh, I forgot about NO BID KBR, Hallibarton contracts etc, etc. If you can honestly( look in the mirror honest) and support this group of people I’d be amazed!!!
|
As you say, Sir, the verdict of history will be most interesting. I suspect it will be at least 50 years before a dispassionate and thorough study of the facts can be conducted.
You make mention of oil companies. Had a person purchased shares of Exxon in 1980, the value would have increased 16 fold today. That doesn't count the 10% dividends that would have been paid each year. Both the President and Vice President have backgrounds in the oil industry. It strains imagination that they would not know the significance of oil depletion, as well is its potential impact on the US economy. Perhaps they acted on that knowledge.
Due to sanctions and poor management, the Iraqi oilfields may not have been well-developed. It is possible that Iraq is one of the great untapped reserves of hydrocarbons available. In addition, it sits in the middle of a strategically essential resource - crude oil distributed in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Iran. If we suppose the possibility that our nation depends on cheap and abundant crude oil, as I believe it does, and if we also suppose that our leadership was aware of these factors, then perhaps protection of our economy was the true national security issue. If that happens to be the case, then it seems unlikely that we can fully withdraw anytime soon.
Would the great majority of people be willing to fight a war for purely economic purposes? I suspect not - at least, not yet. Should a leader pursue a course for one reason, while claiming a different reason? I'll leave that question to folks wiser than I.