If Lindy wants a real conspiracy here's one for the world...
IRAQ's quagmire is really a proxy for a EURO-US war. The insurgency is funded and supplied weaponry and explosives by European arms makers whose tacit approval of their government allows the insurgency to thrive and prosper.
Europe wants Iraq back. Saddam was their boy, just as Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is their boy. It represents some 120,000,000,000 per year in income. They were getting oil for next to nothing under Saddam. A few million in arms, explosives and operatives is cheap if it gets the US to withdraw so they can claim the oil, and be the sole provider of Iraq's infrastructure, munitions and armaments once again.
That's the big conspiracy you wont find on the websites, and amid the many anti-US "US" media outlets owned by Hachette-Fillipachi et al.
Puts a new spin on things doesn't it? Makes one see why Europe (aside from Poland, Spain, Italy and the UK) offered no forces - doesn't it?
The notable absences (France, Germany, Belgium) were deafening - they would be fighting themselves. They've paid good money, and mercenary technical assistance to the insurgency to help recover Iraq.
But I've already revealed WAY too much here.
Current Events » in reply to Small point re: the UN
PS - A real conspiracy for LindyJackEric et al
The whole thread (61 posts)
- Conservatives: If we could do it all over again, would we still invade Iraq?
- re: Conservatives: If we could do it all over again, would we still invade Iraq?
- re: Conservatives: If we could do it all over again, would we still invade Iraq?
- Hindsight is always 20/20.
- Probably not
- The problem with conservatives....
- Yes.
- Yes.
- re: Yes.
- Yeap.
- re: excellent, but you forgot one thing:
- That's pretty much how I see it. (n/t)
- Here's where we differ
- re: The two next presidential contenders
- The next President will not have to deal with the war in Iraq.
- And a further point to consider is...
- re: And in november?
- " The American people would never have supported an invasion of a foreign nation which posed no direct threat, simply for economic or geopolitical reasons. "
- your drinking cool-aid if you think it was for those reasons.
- re: " The American people would never have supported an invasion of a foreign nation which posed no direct threat, simply for economic or geopolitical reasons. "
- The next President will not have to deal with the war in Iraq.
- Loaded question. But yes.