3 little letters o i l.or to go one further then daddy!

I would describe it in one word: Delusion

Quite a few of the American planners tenuously held onto the indea that they were fighting for an imporvement to the populace and helping export and improve American relations in the region. Oil helped, but I don't think anyone seriously believes it was the main motivation. The US still had tons more oil coming from Iraq before the war than it does now. The War was disastrous for the Iraqi oil industry. The thing about WMDs was both stupid, aaaand mostly fabricated.

So, exporting Democracy and goodwill.

How did that go, again?

I still laugh at the idea of establishing democracies through war :P.

or we are fighting for peace!its like fucking for viginity :p

Wow, how quick we believe the obvious...Democracy? Iraq will never be a democracy. Iraq is a system of equipment Cache's and GD training sites to hold in place, Turkey, Iran, Syria and the rest of the Middle East. Keep you friends close and your enemy's closer....The Army is full of Salty Soldiers that have trained and fought in a real COIN environment. That Experience is worth the 10 billion a month were paying if a real enemy comes knocking on Freedoms door...I've been there twice and would go again.

Ok then, can or has democracy ever be(en) successfully installed by force and should it ever be attempted? The Iraq war is a crazy example where there was no real plan (as far as I can tell) for the power vacuum after the removal of the governing power, but could it work (or can democracy only be achieved by the power of the people)?

O peration
I raqi
L iberation

Because they hate our freedom. If we bomb the shit out of them maybe they'll understand why America is the bestest. Obese and free!

No, but seriously, it has to do with extending America's power in the world, though I think a more subtle tactic was probably more advisable than a war. Iraq was switching to the Euro for selling it's oil, undermining the dollar and the American empire. In fact, Iraq was negotiating massive deals with France, which is the main reason France was the most vocal against the war in Iraq. The scary thing is that Iran is switching to the Euro as it's currency of choice for oil trading and is negotiating major oil trades with China...

Hmm, I was expecting at least one or two pro-Bush responses that I could argue against. Guess I over estimated the chance of some one like that playing a game called "Diplomacy".

Adding to what Chrispminis said, if China and O.P.E.C. change their currency to the Euro it could potentially bankrupt the U.S. with its huge debt to China and its dependence on the middle east for oil.

Making the Euro the primary reserve currency wouldn't do that. It just means that the oil would be denominated in Euros instead of dollars. That would reek havoc with exchange rates all over but it wouldn't bankrupt America. Countries don't really go bankrupt like people do because their debt is mostly in treasury bonds. The last thing China and the little Gulf States (OPEC is really a different sort of animal here) would want is for the United States to become insolvent. They stand to lose TRILLIONS in that nightmare scenario. Not to mention that the whole world will come down with them. No, I can see arguments aplenty about the pros or cons about the war in Iraq, but this is almost a Sicarian kind of accusation to make.

Going to war is a tapestry of different motivations where each thread of it has its own origin and color.

Just as in Diplomacy, you have the way you sell your plan to a coalition and the different ideas behind the plan, so it is in the real world. The reason your ally joins you in a war is not YOUR reason but their own.

What functioned in the mind of those that provided the leadership push for this was varied, what motivated those that supported it in different ways is also varied.

There is not a single motivation that everyone agrees to, nor is there is a lock step march in the cascade of events in international politics in the current world dynamics.

You need a greater understanding of the forces at play, both the macro and micro in the individuals as well as the institutions/organizations and the like.

I understand it is a complex issue, but you must have an opinion, Edi, on the real reasons or motivating factors for the Iraq invasion... and just to add, personally I think it was more due Wolfowitz and those figures behind the leadership rather than George W. Bush that were the driving force...

yes, there were so many differnet reasons, the reason at the front kept changing as well. "bringing democarcy to the middle east" was only really pushed as a stated aim after the whole WMD reason fell apart. but i guess you could just say it was a mix of
energy security and control, reassert US dominance in the region and beyond and establish a new garrison state with a compliant puppet government in the middle east as Saudi arabia was kicking US troops out.
Fot the neo cons who love this whole spreading democracy BS it was a dream come true. palestine had free elections, they voted in Hamas, Algeria had free elections and they voted in the islamic FIS, if egypt wasnt a brutal one party state and held real elections then the muslim brotherhood would probably win there. turkey had them and the islamic welfare party won there. spreading democracy via free elections doesnt win the US any friends in the middle east, spreading democracy via an invasion and keeping 150,000 troops does.

you could also take a step back and see the logic of a miltary industrial complex the US has built up needs a enemy, it needed one weak enough so it could be easily crushed(north korea was out then, as is china,russia) but strong enough so it could demonise it for public consumption ( a small island in the carribean sea wont do this time, or a small central american nation. just too 1980s, islam is the new thing) and finally it needs to contain resources (sorry rwanda,somalia you just wont do) to pay for the operation. the neo cons 5 years ago were claiming that within a year iraq could pay back the cost of the operation and the whole thing would turn a profit.

complete folly and such a waste

Look I promise you it's not oil. Think for two seconds and you'll realize that.

Well, it's not oil in the sense that America went there to bring back oil...

It's oil in the sense that it was triggered by the switch to the Euro as the standard for oil trading. Not so much as getting oil as it is asserting dominance in the area and in the oil trade.

That's why we should go back to whale oil.

ah yes the killing of living things because most americans seem to think feet are for working the gas pedal

i do love the fact that a country obsessed with cars cant as a nation understand roundabouts

Not a fan of roundabouts...case in point, National Lampoons European Vacation: "Look kids, Big Ben...Parliament!" :)

Michigan Lefts, on the other hand, are the way to go.

I prefer the Pittsburgh Left.

The difference between Zimbabwe and Iraq? Iraq was relatively stable but had Oil.....

Overly simplistic ideals for the cause of wars are for idealist and fools. Oil is only one of many reasons, and a monor one at that.

Zimbabewe is also a good deal away from US basis and not in a geographic important location. What many people forget is that the middle east has allways been an important cross roads for air and sea travel and trade. Just look at what is happening with the pirates in Red Sea.

and when did suddenly the pirates off africa become such a big news story, when they hijacked a ship carrying oil!

Um, oil's important. Pirates hijacking an oil tanker is a big deal. The simplest solution is usually the right one.

exactly, hence oil in iraq = war

There's a difference between simple and simplistic.

so why do you think america and england invaded iraq?

England did it cause we were (and still are) America's bitches. The US government says "jump" the PM says "how high".
As for why the US invaded Iraq. I think mainly it was because the change in Oil pricing to the Euro would have taken quite a large chunk off the value of the dollar and Bush couldnt accept that his economy relied so heavily on foreign powers.