View Single Post
Old 02-17-2011 | 03:17 PM
  #9  
Grumble
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,489
Likes: 98
Default

Originally Posted by olympic
4500 fallen soldiers unfortunately, and over 10,000 innocent Iraqi casualties how sad. If Saddam was the only reason we went to Iraq I wouldn't have a problem, but the real issue is the oil below their land, but this is the world we live in today.
A vast majority of the civilian casualties were victims of insurgent activity. Look at the comparisons between post war Iraq and post war Germany. Germany had a Nazi insurgency that refused to give up and pulled a lot of the same tactics in an effort to regain control by trying to turn the population against the Allies. It wasn't until they were fed up and squashed the insurgency themselves did they regain any stability. Iraq is ethinically much more diverse but there are a lot of parallels. The oil argument is continually driven by those that don't have anything else to argue. Tell me, if that were the case then why have oil and gas prices continued to rise in the west? They're triple (depending on how you add it up) now what they were in 2003. If we were looking to secure our own source, we'd be paying much less. The reality is we've (the coalition) helped them rebuild and secure the infastructure in order to help the gov't there become self sufficient and get back in the market. The fact is most Iraqi oil exports go to Asia (China, India and South Korea). The major source of oil in the US is domestic production, Saudi Arabia, Africa, Canada and South America, not in that order. Of the imports, Canada is the biggest supplier to the US.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/p...nt/import.html
Reply