"S Green" wrote snip

Iraqi oil production was minimal because of the sanctions and if any oil did
make its way to the US it would have probably been a mistake. The only oil
that was allowed to be exported was for humanitarian supplies. Therefore US
imports of oil from Iraq were zero before the war. Because Iraqi oil
production has been held back for 14 odd years the Iraqis have some of the
biggest oil reserves known.
So going to war to steal Iraq's oil is not an unreasonable assumption. It is
not just a matter of current production it is about access to future
production and the control of the reserves.

Sure it's an unreasonable assumption. The burden of proof is upon the
person making the charge of stealing (that would be you, Green.) I see
no evidence that spending 170 billion was a secret plot to steal such
a small (5% of total U.S. import) oil. Future undeveloped oil fields
cost a fortune in development, require regional stability, and their
future output is theroretical at best. But this charge of stealing is
a moot point anyway. Once we hand over control, that oil can go to the
world market (not just the U.S.) The difference will be that the oil
proceeds this time will go more towards improving the standard of
living for common Iraqies instead of all to a madman building secret
"superguns" (1991) and other military hardware to support more 8-year
wars on his neighbors (e.g. the Iran-Iraq war.) Looking for WMD is
what the Bush Admin did. Just because they didn't discover
functioning a-bombs or bugs doesn't mean those things didn't slip into
Syria before we got there. Saddam = weapon purchases and regional
war. USA/handover = oil production and money spread to more
individuals (we hope.)

Its of no consequence to the US whether the Iraqi oil production is high or
low at the moment as their is a glut of oil. In fact I suspect that the US
is happy for it to take some time before Iraqi oil production is up to pre
Gulf War I levels.

Hmmm, you said pre war production was zero (see your quote above.)
Martin posted a link that in 1999 it was 8% of all US imports (isn't
that pre Gulf War II ? I guess you meant the immediate period before
invasion?


Its like keeping money in the bank.

Mind you some Iraqi people might like to see production and exports rise and
try and get living standards back to what they used to be.

But again, who is all this revenue going to go to? Warlords? Madmen?
Some long lost royal familly? Radical terrorists? I betcha none of
them want it to go to their people. I want us to pull out, but I
realize it's going to be a disaster any way we do it.

I supported both invasions, but I am against this occupation. Our
attempts at helping these people achieve freedom is unappreciated.
There is no way to convert oppressed peoples who have not the courage
to throw off their oppressors themselves. Believing that all people
on this earth deserve freedom is where Bush screwed up. The guy is
too big-hearted. Our reconstruction efforts also appear to be
unappreciated. My conclusion is that some people just don't deserve
to be liberated. We should pull out and let the place fall into civil
war. If it spreads into the other oilfields then we'll come back and
bomb them again.

Is this what you want, Green?

pacplyer