The REAL reasons why we are in Iraq.


Jun 30, 2003
I'm posting this in response the the Iraq-bin ladin connection article i read in the other thread. Really to make a point why that is irrelevent anyway. I think it is sad the people really don't understand why we ever went there in the first. There are many important events that effect our everday lives that people just have little understand of. Most people don't understand how the Patriot Act(s), HOmeland Security acts, etc effect our everyday lives and are a drastic invasion of privacy and UNCONSTITIONAL. They only go passed because of the Chaos of the 9/11 and the war on "Terrorism"...but i digress. I hope this stimulates some nice conversation.

...but I think people really need to understand what this was all about if they don't already understand or if it hasn't been pointed out to them yet. I've been to Iraq and seen this first hand and I wasn't on a military assisnment. I speak Arabic and went with an Iraqi Chaldean delegation..met with BreHydromaxer's administration, other senators that were there and the whole nine yards. I was there in October and November. If you have more interest about what I saw..ask questions because I saw some interesting when they bombed Wolfiwitz's hotel. It was across the Babylon river ..acrross from hotel.I stayed at the Babylon Hotel. I went to old fedayeen camps..even ate at Saddam's favorite restaurant where he would do deals with the French government...seen some interesting things. I left right before it got really out of control with the car bombings, etc.

This war in iraq was effectively about Oil and its impeding effect on the world's economy.(peak to learn more. But not for the reasons that people would think.This isn't about greedy corporation. It is much more serious than that. It is about Oil and the Euro.Without getting into a dissertation about the alarming U.S. national debt(12 trillion), the growing budget deficit, our growing consumption of oil, and the world's twindling supply of oil reserves, and the fact that all oil trading is done with the U.S. dollar, I can stil l make a point that should be easily understood.

The world's reserve currency is the U.S. dollar. The U.S. is bankrupt but because the world currency is the U.S dollar and we have the printing press with the federal reserves..we can essentially print money at will in our currency and float it in the market to buy goods like Oil. We can create "fiat money" out of thin air because the world's currency is our currency and we have a monopoly on its production. The world is pretty much financing our country. With the every shrinking oil supply( search for peak oil), the fact the Iraq went to the euro to take payments and other countries were considering it( it would DEMOLISH our country)..If they convinced opec and other countries, which was happening, to go to the euro, our u.s. dollar is no longer the worlds reserve currency, the dollar would disastrously plummet as people would convert their dollars to Euros..and because we are essentially a debtor nation and bankrupt and we don't have a printing press on euro. We could not buy oil.

We don't have the money. We just print fiat money through the fed to finance everything. With our 7 trillion in debt, huge oil appetite, etc are talking about making the great depression look like disneyland(for a case study on what happens when you can't buy oil..look at what happened to north korea). Essentially we would have to announce bankrupty because of our oil appetite and our astronomical debt load which we will essentially never be able to repay anyone(but the position of the U.S. dollars is the only thing that keep us afloat..we haven't been the worlds economic superpower for quite some is a world economy)..the country would come to standstill from inflation and increased interests rates because of high oil prices..We would go into insolvency.Iraq has the second largest proven oil reserves and was venerable because of Saddam. We had to stop him from taking transactions on the euro and convincing other countries to do so. Opec would love nothing more than to convert to the Euro. Every dollar they receive and store in U.S. currency continues to lose a tremendous amount of value becuase of the continuous drag of the U.S. dollar. However, no one has the power to go against the will of our military. Challengers only have to think of Saddam as an illustration of our will if it goes unoppossed. The U.S.(neo conservs are in power) could give two shits about Saddam and his internal politics, disastrous human rights policy, weapons of mass destruction ( he is one of many of dictactors with the same record). Saddam was strategic to a movement that has a belief in the statement "the ends justifies the means". . This administration and the neoconservatives are all student of Nikkolo Machievelli, the man who penned the phrase. Only need to know his history to understand the type of element that is currently in power. These statements aren't speculation but verifiable facts. To understand the elements of the current policy in regards to Iraq is to see that this war was inevitable and planned by this administration. 9/11 was the disaster that the needed to implement this plan under the tag of a war against "terrorism". To understand the goal of this administration is to understand what our policy will be in Iraq and in the middle east in general and for Israel in general. One can easily determine what will happen and why...makes it very easy to understand why we picked a character like Chalibi for leadership and one doesn't need to media to understand why he has been disenfranchised.

So the reasons why we are in Iraq:

1. If the world began using the Euro to trade in oil our country would lose economic control and Saddam was pushing this.
2. Iraq has the worlds second largest oil reserves in the new era of Penis EnlargementAK OIL (you can do a search on google to learn about this monumental event in the world's history.
3. We needed to have a democratic government in the heart of this part of the world because of the coming world's oil crisis.

This is about the survival of America as the World's SUPenis EnlargementRPOWER. That is what these people want to remain.

There was NO CONNECTION between 9/11 and Iraq. There we NO weapons of mass destruction. WE KNEW this and just used it as an excuse to invade Iraq. We needed the world trade center bombing to do this.

Someone asked my with knowing that the U.S. ecomony was crashing and I was president and Iraq was the solution..would I have made the war on Iraq? My response was this:This is my issue with going to War though it may end being something that almost seemed necessary.

I don't believe that the ends justifies the can't be immoral in the name of morality..that constitutes a contradiction of terms. Contradictions don't exist. If you check one of your premises you will find that one of them is wrong, but that is a philophical argument.

But no. The problem is with our ever growing state of our mixed economy. We are moving more away from capitalism and more towards fascism. Iraq just buys time.

Going to Iraq is like trying to cure a dying tree by examining the leaves. You need to examine the roots. Our problem is the lose of value of the U.S. dollar. We need to get off the unconstitutional private instituation of the Federal Reserve System. It is the #1 problem with our ecomony and has contributed nothing by debt to our county from the day of its inception. It is virus that will lead to our death. We need to have government issued currency. Government issued currency was our constitution right. If you don't understand the nature of the federal reserve, you should do some research.

Number 2...cut the increasing government spending deficit. Again, the only way this is possible because we have access to unlimited fiat money through the federal reserve.

Begin to clean the system of non essential government instituations that are rooted in socialism. Essentially everything began with Hoover and then extended with Nixon. Our government is drastically oversized.

Place economists in the key positions that are educated in Austrian economists(especially that of Ludwig von Mises). Our country has been lead astray by Keynesians.

The U.S. hasn't been the world economic power for quite sometime now. It is a world economy, with Europe and now India becoming very strong because it is a knowledge center. SOmeone mentioned China being a power to be watched. The Yen is undervalued now, but china faces HUGE problems moving has over 1 billion people, but only 1.2 million have college educations, privatization issues, etc.

But, Iraq is not a solution. We still don't know how that situation will play out. Iraq will NEVER be a democracy..NEVER. at best it will be a Republic. However, at this point, we don't know if we can accomplish our puppet government so it may all have been for nothing.


Nov 3, 2003
Say what you want about Iraq, but the simple fact is we know they had WMDs because we supplied them. There are records of us providing weapons grade Anthax, among other things, to Iraq for "research" purposes. This is fact. To argue otherwise is willful, partisan blindness.

Have you ever stopped to think that maybe the terrorists didn't fear our response to a 9-11 attack because of the historical reponses to terrorism under the Clinton administration? Thanks to the inactions of Clinton, we were viewed as weak and lazy in the eyes of the world. An easy target who would be too afraid or too PC to do anything about such an attack. Perhaps the Bush Admin response in Afghanistan and Iraq is the reason we have not lost any more American lives to terrorism within our borders since 9-11.


Jun 30, 2003
I've made other posting on other boards about this...maybe i will copy and paste it here. I understand our affiliations with Saddam. We supplied him in the Iran-Iraq war because of our fears of Iranian dominance in that region.We chose the lesser of two evils..much like we supplied Bin Ladin when he faught our enemies..the Russians. What's i'm trying to tell you is that this was not the reason we invaded Iraq. WMD are irrelevant. I've probably written ten pages about this tonight so I'm too exhuasted to reply in much depth tonight..though i may come back tomorrow.


Sep 21, 2003
Awsome read!


I was always wondering about this. I am one to question everything and I knew there was something bigger behind all of this.

If you got any other good posts like this about the US please post I am willing to read.



Lifetime Diamond Supporter
Dec 5, 2003
Worst president in history?
(The following appeared in the Durham, NC local paper as a letter to the editor.)

Please forward to all on your list so as to put things in perspective.

Liberals claim President Bush shouldn't have started this war.
They complain about his mismanagement of it.
One liberal recently claimed Bush was the worst president in U.S. history.

Let's clear up one point:

President Bush didn't start the war on terror.

Try to remember, it was started by terrorists BEFORE 9/11.
OK, let's look at the "worst" president nominees and "mismanagement"claims.

FDR led us into World War II.
Germany never attacked us, Japan did.
From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost,
an average of 112,500 per year.

Truman finished that war and started one in Korea.
North Korea never attacked us.
From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost,
an average of 18,333 per year.

John F. Kennedy started the Vietnam conflict in 1962.
Vietnam never attacked us.

Johnson turned Vietnam into a quagmire.
From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost,
an average of 5,800 per year.

Clinton went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent.
Bosnia never attacked us.
Clinton was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three times by Sudan and he did nothing.
Osama has attacked us on multiple occasions.
Over 2,900 lives were lost on 9/11.

In the two years since terrorists attacked us,
President Bush has
liberated two countries,
rushed the Taliban,
crippled al-Qaida,
put nuclear inspectors in Lybia, Iran, and North Korea
without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist
who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.

We have lost 600 soldiers, an average of 300 a year.

Bush did all this abroad while not allowing another terrorist attack at home.

Worst president in history?

Sure doesn't appear to be Bush!

The Democrats are complaining about how long the war is taking, but...

It took less time to take Iraq
than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound.
That was a 51 day operation.

We've been looking for evidence of chemical weapons
in Iraq for less time
than it took Hillary Clinton to find
the Rose Law Firm billing records.

It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard
than it took Teddy Kennedy to call the police after his Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.

It took less time to take Iraq
than it took to count the votes in Florida!!!!

Our military is GREAT!


Active member
Dec 10, 2003
There is a problem with the oil theory, which also seems to attach itself to the "world" economy. The oil wells that were dug in the late 1940 and were in fact depleted by the mid-late 1970s have actually begun to refill. That's right, the wells that were dug and completely "empty" have begun to refill themselves, scientists are analyzing theses wells, in hopes of oil being an infinite resource.

I have been looking for the article that this came from, I'm not sure if it was a research magazine, but it was brought to me at work one day and I can't seem to find it. It appears as though there is extensive research into this, and hopefully in the next two to three years there will be enough evidence to prove that oil is not a finite resource. The theory states that there must be a legitimate process that allowed the oil to manifest itself in these wells, so there must be a mechanism that will refill them. Just a thought, and I will continue to look for the info. Holla
Top Bottom