America in Iraq

jesus_thats_gre

There seems to be alot of arguments as to who is killing who in Iraq. This argument seems to be taking centre stage on boards.ie at the moment. But what about the old reliable, why are America in Iraq. Do you lot still think its about oil?

Big Ears

At first it was about oil , now its about elections .

halkar

After elections it will be about oil again:D

Memnoch

the US wants to bring democracy to Iraq... they are in Iraq to fight the enemies of freedom.

They are also trying to reduce terrorism accross the world, and this is part of the american on going War on Terror.

The champions of freedom shall triumph and democracy will reign in Iraq despite the attempts of the terrorists.

jesus_thats_gre

Sarcasm? :dunno:

TomF

A left-leaning commentator in America has probably hit the nail on the head in a column (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4806524 ) that includes this:

"Bush has a plan and a vision: His goal is to protect the American homeland by spreading democracy (by military force if necessary) to the cockpit of Islamic fundamentalism. This idea strikes many serious people as naïve and grandiose at best, dangerously imperious and counter-productive at worst. But what, precisely, is the better idea?"

bonkey

Originally posted by TomF
A left-leaning commentator in America has probably hit the nail on the head in a column (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4806524 ) that includes this:

TomF posts another link to another article, vaguely related to the topic at hand, explaining again why the Democrats will lose the forthcoming election.

News at 11.

jc

Redleslie

Originally posted by bonkey
TomF posts another link to another article, vaguely related to the topic at hand, explaining again why the Democrats will lose the forthcoming election.

News at 11.

jc

Maybe he's under the impression that Ireland is a swing voter suburb of Asshole, Ohio or something and we can be persuaded to vote for Cheney/Dubya in November if he posts enough links.

Quote from that article - "Let’s face it, as a people we tend to like simple answers and strong leaders who propound them." Isn't that a bit of a problem?

bonkey

Originally posted by Redleslie
Quote from that article - "Let’s face it, as a people we tend to like simple answers and strong leaders who propound them." Isn't that a bit of a problem?

Lets not go too far off-topic here...good point, but probbly for another discussion.

jc

vorbis

I wouldn't say they are there entirely for the oil. Setting up a proper democratic government in Iraq will be a boost to US foreign policy in the middle east. They were getting very cheap oil off Iraq before the war under the oil for food programme. I guess a US friendly government will help secure future supplies of oil.

Mickah

Money.

Oil businesses in the US leaned like hell on the government; they needed a steady flow of oil.

Huge Corporations will make a fortune out of the war (supplying equipment) and rebuilding Iraq.

Bush and co. stand to make money due to their involvement is various American corporations.

Why the hell are Israel getting so much support from America? Cos they're a democracy? Bullsh1t, alot of Jews are in powerful positions and are demanding action. Like the Irish Americans and the IRA.

It's all about the money.

Memnoch

Originally posted by vorbis
I wouldn't say they are there entirely for the oil. Setting up a proper democratic government in Iraq will be a boost to US foreign policy in the middle east. They were getting very cheap oil off Iraq before the war under the oil for food programme. I guess a US friendly government will help secure future supplies of oil.

are you naieve or just ..........

a proper democratic government in iraq would not sell oil to the US at prices it demands, nor would it give all the "reconstruction" contracts to companies set by the US, etc etc etc etc...

if you really think that the US wants democracy in iraq you need to take your blanket out of your head and come out of your cave. oh and unplug fox news

mr_angry

Originally posted by TomF
"But what, precisely, is the better idea?"

The ultimate demonstration of a flawed argument, in my opinion. The result of either

a) An unwillingness to accept any other form of action, or
b) Being too lazy to think of anything else.

Anyway, the American presence in Iraq is the result of a number of factors, few of which seem to be valid:

• Finishing off the job attempted by George Bush Snr.
• Control of oil supplies
• Creating an American presence in the Gulf, facilitating greater military activity, greater political influence, and less pressure on Israel
• To liberate the Iraqi population from the control of a barbaric dictator (yes - a valid reason - try not to laugh)

The main reasons they're still there now are:

• To protect people like Haliburton employees who have to ensure they still make a nice hefty profit on the deal
• If they leave, the militants seize power again, and...
• It would be a gigantic embarrasment and humiliation for them if it looked like they were pushed out by the militants. I can hardly believe that GWB's election campaign could get any worse, but that might top it off.

vorbis

Originally posted by Memnoch
are you naieve or just ..........

a proper democratic government in iraq would not sell oil to the US at prices it demands, nor would it give all the "reconstruction" contracts to companies set by the US, etc etc etc etc...

if you really think that the US wants democracy in iraq you need to take your blanket out of your head and come out of your cave. oh and unplug fox news

I can't help it if you feel the need to continually portray the US as some sort of great Satan. A proper iraqi governemnt would probably sell oil at OPEC rates. I doubt the US would be able to do much to stop them joining that cartel. By your logic the US would have dismantled OPEC years ago as it is the main reason for high oil prices. I still believe personally that a democratic government is in the US's interests for the following reasons.
1 Guarantees future oil supplies from Iraq
2 Can be used by Bush as a political coup for the elections
3 If handled well, gains America an ally in the middle east.

Also how would I take a blanket out of my head? sounds painful.

halkar

Vorbis, there is no such a thing as a democratic government in Middle East. Even Israel isn't. Having an election doesn't actually make anyone democratic. After all, Saddam did have an election and he won with 99% .
If you look at the world of Islam you will not see any government that was elected by people other than the Turkish government, yes , its a muslim country with democratically elected government and secular (probably more than Ireland and some other countries in Europe), It took more than 150 years to form democracy in Turkey , going back the earlier cabinets of Ottomans in 1800s and first cabinet of Turkish Republic at 1920 and elections since. And Turks are not Arabs and mostly Sunni. Now, considering Iraq's shia majority. how does one can possible think that America can bring democrasi to Iraq in 1 year , 10 years or 100 years. It will not happen.
If you look at the near history, you will see that oil was crucial for any nation. Like Japan attacked islands of Indonesia when US stopped selling oil to them, Hitler wanted to control caspian region for the oil to his war machines and so does the Russians. And now US wants it to power their V8s and they still building sh!t load of them

vorbis

halkar, I'd regard Israel as a democracy. There are some issues there about the franchise size but overall I'd say its a democracy. America I believe will bring a democratic government to Iraq. All it will take is for the major clerics to form political parties and compete in an internationally verified election. I think most of the nutters exploding bombs today in Iraq are not representive of the people. Certainly their target selection is not consistent with traditional "freedom fighting". I'd say they've killed more Iraqis than coalition forces.

An example I think the shias could follow is the kurds. They have their region stablilised and under control. As a result the American presence in their area is nominal and they are already largely ruling themselves. No reason why the shias couldn't adopt the same plan (i.e. stabilise the security situation in their areas). Its a quicker route to indepence than trying to blow the coalition forces up.

halkar

Well unfortunately not so black and white as you suggest with Shias following the route of Kurds. For them US is enemy and anyone supports US are enemy too. Not repeating myself but when Shias win against US , I fear for the Kurds as being closest allies of the US.
They can not divide the country as this will totally mess up middle east. But under Bush regime I think anything is possible to do and i wouldn't surprise if he gives up and just takes the North of Iraq where Kurds are and adds it as a new US state Well anything possible :rolleyes: , who dare stopping Bush

vorbis

I don't think the shias will win halkar. tbh I think the sunnis have been responsible for most of the violence in Iraq so far. then again they have the most to fear from a new government (as in loss of power). I don't think they will divide the country per se, but three autonomous regions (similar in principle to Spain) wouldn't be a bad idea.

halkar

Shias are majority and any democratic election will give them the power, to me this is what America does not want to happen. They are in search of a secular shia leader that might go in power in Iraq but they have a better chance of finding needle in hay. Again to me in the long run Sunni and Shias will unite and fight to Americans as both doesn't want them there. If all goes like that Kurds might suffer at the end unless they can somehow join the Sunnis and Shias but they are completely different story in the region. We all know what they want but that will not happen as far as I can imagine Shias or Sunnis does not want to divide the country. In which ever way you look at it, today they are invaded and probably will fight to invaders as united and if they succeed, they will turn to eachother. Sounds extreme but its possible. America can not stay in Iraq for long without the support of Shias and Sunnis and doesn't look like they will be getting much of that unless they can understand their needs and stop calling every leader in Iraq as terrorists in front of the world media. Iraq has a lot of tribes and tribal leaders but for US anyone that doesn't like their ideas are terrorists and yet they are the ones doing most of the killing.

vorbis

I wouldn't be so sure about the whole shia - sunni unity thing. Fair enough a similar situation occurred in Afghanistan for the soviet and british invasions of it. However, I reckon the majority of shias are playing a waiting game. (seeing what democracy will bring). The sunnis to me would be the real troublemakers in Iraq. Most stories are still about Baghad and Falujah. As you say yourself halkar, the shias should win a proper democratic election so why jepardise that?

halkar

Problem is that I doubt US will accept Shias as the governor body of Iraq. At first forget about democrasi for Iraq, it wasn't there and it will not be there for sometime to come. Look at Afghanistan? They said the same thing when they went in and after few years there is still no elections there and most laws that passes still goes to mollas for aproval under islamic rules.

Now that US started to make U turns and that they will be asking ex-Baathists to come back to work with them after saying, there was no way Baath members be near the government last year. What does this mean to you? To me, US is losing total control and try to win Sunnis by offering their jobs back so US can deal with Shias. But I think this will back fire on US as Shias will not like the idea of ex-Baathists gaining their jobs either. While at it why not just bring Saddam back too

You seem to be very optimistic with peace there but US does not really want peace as you and I would like them to have. If Shias take control, US will loose Iraq and come home empty handed and Iran will win the old Iraq-Iran war. I don't see Shias working with US at any time and I don't see US giving up Iraq at anytime soon either so violance continues unfortunately.

vorbis

I don't doubt halkar that securing peace in Iraq is going to take quite a while. The difference to Afghanistan though is that theres a clear route to power available for the shias. If they form a political party that seems reasonably secular and fairly contest an election, they will win it. I think the Americans would accept shia power under such a guise. If the shias can't see that, then personally I believe that would make them one of the most politically ignorant races on the planet. I doubt they are and I think that is shown by the relatively slow level of incidents by shia terrorists.

By ex - Baathists what positions are you on about? Is it simply more security forces?

halkar

Here is a link about the ex-Baathists
Sunnis are more likely to be secular then shias so if US beleives that they will have a secular democrasy in Iraq with Shia majority, they can dream on forever, it will not happen maybe until another few generations. US will try to adjust Iraqi laws to their needs and I doubt that the Shias will like the idea of this, they didn't like the laws that US put in place last year either.

vorbis

fair point halkar, but surely the shias should be judging any future government against what they had under Sadamm. Sadamm maintained the ruling of Iraq soley by the Sunnis. A secular government dominated by shias is surely far more preferable than what they had under Sadamm.

Tuars

Originally posted by vorbis
A secular government dominated by shias is surely far more preferable than what they had under Sadamm.

I don't think a secular government will be viable in any sense in Iraq. The current culture just won't allow it.

Also, I don't think the Shias will be viewing their future options through the lens of 'better than Saddam'. Saddam is gone, the slate had been wiped clean. They're going to go for the best they can get. And for them I don't think that means a secular government.

vorbis

if the shias adopt that attitude tuars, then they're going to effectively be starting a civil war against the sunnis. I can't see how that helps them, unless of course their aim is the extermination of the sunnis. (could be) A secular governemnt that gets recoginised by the US will cause US troops to leave far faster than anything else the shias are capable of.