Bush Invaded Iraq for oil

**BFritz** · 11-04-2007, 08:53 PM

This show on TV right now (I think it's NBC) is saying how US officials and German allies to the US decided to go into Iraq based on information that there was WMD, so how come nobody ever tells about this and just keeps blaming Bush? They just use Bush as a scapegoat for the war and then all their other problems.

**Beef** · 11-04-2007, 09:03 PM

Since there weren't any WMDs, people need something to blame it on. The intelligence was there for an invasion based on WMDs and it was good enough to get votes from both sides of the aisle to allow the US to invade. Was it bad info? So it seems but IMO it is better not to have Sadam in control of Iraq, a country that a least once had WMDs and had used them on their own people. Also, I believe that with all the warnings that the US gave to Iraq, and all the time, it allowed Sadam to move the weapons so that he would look clean.

**BFritz** · 11-05-2007, 12:25 AM

Beef Wrote:Since there weren't any WMDs, people need something to blame it on. The intelligence was there for an invasion based on WMDs and it was good enough to get votes from both sides of the aisle to allow the US to invade. Was it bad info? So it seems but IMO it is better not to have Sadam in control of Iraq, a country that a least once had WMDs and had used them on their own people. Also, I believe that with all the warnings that the US gave to Iraq, and all the time, it allowed Sadam to move the weapons so that he would look clean.

Exactly, and people who hate Bush and blame everything on him (even their misfortunes in life), feel better about their life when they can blame it on someone else.

**vundy33** · 11-05-2007, 12:53 AM

I agree 100%...Alot of the people that were for the war at first are now against it.

**BFritz** · 11-05-2007, 01:11 AM

vundy33 Wrote:I agree 100%...Alot of the people that were for the war at first are now against it.

People say "then why doesn't Bush tell us if it wasn't his idea?" Because if people think the President doesn't take blame for anything and sends us into blood baths at other people's recommendations, people would revolt and he'd be the worst President in history.

**Beef** · 11-05-2007, 02:26 AM

BFritz Wrote:People say "then why doesn't Bush tell us if it wasn't his idea?" Because if people think the President doesn't take blame for anything and sends us into blood baths at other people's recommendations, people would revolt and he'd be the worst President in history.

And I think also, Bush can't just change his mind now. We have already committed so many troops to that region that the Commander in Chief cannot pull them out quickly like many are asking. If it was anyone else in the White House we would still be over there. It is easier to bash the President and change your mind when you are sitting in Congress than it is when you are actually having to make the decisions.

TOMCAT06 · 11-05-2007, 10:06 AM

Beef Wrote:And I think also, Bush can't just change his mind now. We have already committed so many troops to that region that the Commander in Chief cannot pull them out quickly like many are asking. If it was anyone else in the White House we would still be over there. It is easier to bash the President and change your mind when you are sitting in Congress than it is when you are actually having to make the decisions.

I agree, Pull out all of our soldiers over seas now and we won't be able to keep the terrorists from pounding the american soil, it would cause the war on terror to be faught on home turf and unlike football that wouldn't be good!

Coach_Owens87 · 11-05-2007, 03:11 PM

BFritz Wrote:People say "then why doesn't Bush tell us if it wasn't his idea?" Because if people think the President doesn't take blame for anything and sends us into blood baths at other people's recommendations, people would revolt and he'd be the worst President in history.

I think he has already accomplished that

**BFritz** · 11-05-2007, 11:41 PM

Now I'm pretty confident that the people high up in the government caused 9/11, so I wouldn't doubt it if Bush did make the call, but I don't think he did in this instance.

**DevilsWin** · 11-05-2007, 11:48 PM

For those of you that don't already know. Al Qaeda and all those "terrorists" don't hate us because we're rich and free.

They hate us because we are in their lands and because of our support of the Saudi Arabian Dictatorship.

It's not even about Palestine, Israel or Lebanon. <---these issues are small in comparison

To suggest otherwise is absurd.

**thecavemaster** · 11-06-2007, 11:36 AM

Anybody watched "How to create an angry American" on you tube? (I need to learn how to embed)...

JCHS_EAGLE · 11-22-2007, 03:06 AM

Coach_Owens87 Wrote:I think he has already accomplished that

Bush may have went in for WMD but when he was wrong he should have admitted it!! Instead he just kept up the schrade IMO he is there for the OIL.. But even thats not working were still paying $100 a barrel. Yeah it is wrong to blame him for not taking the troops out all at once that would be a terrible thing for the US Soil and The Soldiers that are there right now. But what BUSH did with sending the Surges was just crazy, they didn't work and just got more soldiers killed..

I am ANTI WAR, but I will also say to the Posters that I am not against the TROOPS. I SUPPORT THE TROOPS 110%. But not Bush:redboxer: :mad:

~~ronald_reagan~~ · 11-28-2007, 12:15 AM

BFritz Wrote:Now I'm pretty confident that the people high up in the government caused 9/11.

:thatsfunn :thatsfunn :thatsfunn :thatsfunn