Reply to: What was (is) the war in Iraq for?

[threaded]

Is not the chap from Barnsley a poster on this board or one of it's predecessors? Just recognise the name, 'tis all.

[xoggoth]

You are demonstrating natural human subservience to higher authority R.

When we ask such questions, I think we implicitly assume that there must be some greater wisdom in those who rule us than we ourselves have. There must be some reason behind things that the great and the good know about which is not revealed to us lesser mortals.

Start thinking about Bush/ Blair etc as just a couple of ignorant blokes in the pub who have had the leadership ability to rise to the top of the dungheap and it all makes more sense.

Bush. Why? Some local kid had broken his lounge window so he went out and gave the first kid he found a good kicking. Quite sensible really. It may not have been the right kid but what the heck, word gets around and no local kid was going to do that to his window again.

Blair. Why? Because he's barmy and nothing exists in his stupid sincere grinning head than his own place in history.

[Rebecca Loos]

something to bear in mind is that Blair's rating is actually quite high, and has been high since the beginning of the Iraq war (I read that somewhere, can't remember where). So despite the fact that UK people, on the surface, are against the Iraq war, they are actually rating Blair quite highly.

Maybe his PR machine know it would work - lots of protests yes, but deep down, the whole insecurity this has generated makes people stand by their leader. Even if the insecure and uncertain situation was his fault to start with.

[EC4N]

Please help me understand...

So what's the reason then?

It's Israel's war by proxy.

[threaded]

just like we didn't join them in Vietnam

Hmm, there were British soldiers in Vietnam, and a number of American troops were trained in jungle warfare by the British in Malaya. IIRC the yanks had to wear british uniforms and some brits wore american uniforms...

[GiGo]

The 2nd one was purely because Bush senior failed to topple Saddam and Bush junior had a score to settle.
.

There's a book called the 48 Laws of Power
which says as Law 15

Crush your enemy totally - if one ember is left alight, no matter how dimly it smolders, a fire will eventually break out. More is lost through stopping halfway than through total annihilation: the enemy will recover, and will seek revenge..

[BobTheCrate]

Correcto mundo Not So Wise.

You have the motive in one. It was indeed to keep the momentum going. The campaign against Bin Laden and in Afghanistan had stalled. And in going to Iraq so took their eye off the ball in Afghanistan and Bin Laden.

Nothing more sinister, and nothing more questionable than that.

Blair's motive ?

He simply did not want our American allies to 'go it alone'. Not an unworthy or necessarily irrational reason even though on this occassion I disagree with it.

But why all the ridiculous, deceitful shananakins I'll never understand.

Then again, deceit is Blair's middle name.

[Not So Wise]

Reasons for Iraq? Simple in order

1) Distraction.
They failed to catch Bin Laden in Afganistan, American public were still baying for his blood but Bush needed still keep up the momemtum and be seen to be to doing something.

So for few months they "built the case" against Sadam, but they were not building the case for the UN but really createing the links in the minds of the American Public that Sadam = Bin Landin were both responsible for 9/11, other terrorist links, WMD so forth, all the official reasons for the invasion...woops, "liberation" were just marketing tactics to gather public support.

2) Profit
The invasion generated billions for the US military complex.
The "Rebuilding" is generating billions for US private sector
Oil will generate billions also
And who has shares or is on the boards for all these companys? Bush or his people. By time Bush is out of Office he and his whole administration will be the richest people in the USA.

3)Unfinished Buisness
Iraq always a blot on daddys record

As for Blairs reasons read Wendigo 's post.

[wendigo100]

Tony Blair joined in the invasion of Iraq to make his place in history, as the man who finally rid the world of its favourite bogeyman, like Churchill for defeating Hitler.

I think he is surprised and disappointed that he is not being worshipped for it.

[Bagpuss]

Ever notice wars are often started by old people who are unlikely to be around several years later when the consequnces hit the fan?

[sasguru]

Would a Tory government be any better ...

It's clear to me that we shouldn't have joined the US in this lark, just like we didn't join them in Vietnam.
Whether that has anything to do with fundie bombers is a different issue.
I personally believe there is a growing strain of fascist Islamism which will need brutal suppression and which will require that we take casualties.

Iraq was not the place to start that war though ...

[DimPrawn]

On a connected note, this might push the cost of the war up a bit.

An ex-soldier has been awarded £620,000 damages from the Ministry of Defence for stress suffered while on duty.

[DimPrawn]

Well, the original Iraq war was to protect oil supplies after the invasion of Kuwait.

The 2nd one was purely because Bush senior failed to topple Saddam and Bush junior had a score to settle.

We got involved as we have a pathetic grinning lapdog ******* US obsessed leader.

All the terrorist / WMD wibbling is pure and utter bulltulip to appease the gung ho and hard of thinking.

[The Lone Gunman]

Anyone else with something more constructive than the gay boy LG?

OOOOOOHH chase me.....

What about the fact that there were elections due and a good war always wins votes.

Conspiracy theories 101.
There is no such group as Al Queda. They have been invented by the men behind Governments and security forces whos main aim is to scare the people into accepting an oppressive and intrusive Government.
So the planes in 9/11 and the subsequent bombings have all been part of an elaborate plot carried out by these shadowy characters.
The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were designed to escalate their controls world wide and give them a better grip on the oil producers, the threat bewign that you keep supplying like we say or we will bomb your ass.

They dont call me The Lone Gunman for nothing.

[planetit]

Anyone else with something more constructive than the gay boy LG?

But his three theories sound spot on to me (at least as far as the US is concerned). What the hell we are doing there is a mystery to me.