3 ms·
>> Yes you can argue that the Iraq War was done for oil, it's just not a strong argument. If it wasn't for oil, then for what? Those chemical weapons that were
by mamon 7y ago
>> Yes you can argue that the Iraq War was done for oil, it's just not a strong argument.
If it wasn't for oil, then for what? Those chemical weapons that were never found? All wars that US starts (and 80 percent of all wars in the world are started by US) are either for oil, or other economic interests. "Spreading democracy" is just an excuse used by government's public relations division, but it is not even remotely true. There are many non-democratic countries, which US leave alone, because they have not enough natural resources or other wealth to be taken from them to pay the bill for war - Cuba is one such example.
- navigatesol 7y ago>If it wasn't for oil, then for what? Those chemical weapons that were never found? You have a pretty simplified political view, my friend. Iraq sells oil into a market; how did invading them "get us the oil"?
- mamon 7y agoBefore the war US had to buy that oil at market price and all profits belonged to local companies (or to Russian ones, which also operated there). Since war American companies (Exxon Mobil) were granted licenses to extract oil from Iraq oil fields, and now the profits go to them. Not to mention that after Americans pretty much ruined the country, American companies make ton of money on re-building it from ruins. Pretty smart business model: bomb the country, and then charge it money for re-building it :)
- theklub 7y agoHave you ever heard of Saddam Hussein? There were many reasons to invade.