# My crackpot theory about why we're in Iraq **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [March 23, 2003, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-crackpot-theory-about-why-were-in-iraq/163628 "2003-03-23T22:11:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![JonScribe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/3be4f8/32.png) [@JonScribe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JonScribe)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-crackpot-theory-about-why-were-in-iraq/163628/1 "2003-03-23T22:11:29Z")
OK. I have no cites for this, no evidence, no justification other than my own paranoid fears about what a clusterf\*ck this war will turn out to be. But what if… The real reason we’re in Iraq is to secure a base of operations and a supply of oil with which we can mount an attack against Saudi Arabia. Bush & Co. have not been able to make a convincing argument that Iraq and Saddam Hussein were involved in the Sept. 11 terror attacks, although they have tried to imply the connection in order to win support for the war. But it would be much easier to make a connection between Sept. 11 and Saudi Arabia, even beyond the fact that most of the hijackers were Saudis and that some have said the money trail leads back to Saudi families. I’m making no judgments on the accuracy of those claims, but certainly the possible connections seem more concrete than those made against Iraq. Nor am I saying there is justification for launching an attack on Saudi Arabia. I view Saudia Arabia as an even stickier tarbaby than Iraq. But, since I have my doubts that the freedom of the Iraqi people is the real goal here, I’m left wondering what Bush, Rummy and Dick have planned once we have a friendly government in charge in Iraq and are able to direct its oil (even if we compensate the Iraqi people for it) for any disruption in supply caused by alienating Saudi Arabia with charges of involvement in Sept. 11 or an actual declaration of war against it. Feel free to tell me what a dope I am. Actually, I hope I’m wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-crackpot-theory-about-why-were-in-iraq/163628/2 "2003-03-23T23:45:45Z")
I have serious doubts that the Bush administration will ever launch an attack against [Saudi Arabia](http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-050302bush.story) no matter how closely linked they were to the attacks. > [@](#): > > While conservatives see the Saudis mostly as a problem in the region, the administration sees them as part of the solution to a perplexing dilemma: how to revive a peace process without relying on Arafat, whom the president has made clear he doesn’t trust. The Bush administration’s answer is to increase the role of other Arab nations–led by the Saudis, the Egyptians and the Jordanians–in any talks. Bush administration officials say they believe one reason that President Clinton’s efforts to broker an Israeli-Palestinian deal failed was because he didn’t involve other Arab states until the last moment. [This site](http://www.gooff.com/news/read.asp?ID=1728) claims: > [@](#): > > In Forbidden Truth: U.S.-Taliban Secret Oil Diplomacy and the Failed Hunt for bin Laden, two French intelligence analysts, Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie, claim that the Clinton and Bush administrations impeded investigations of bin Laden and his al Qaeda terrorist group in order to maintain good relations with Saudi Arabia and to maintain the stability of the oil market. " (Note: I make no claims as to the veracity of this site. There are many others which make identical claims.) ---
**Author:** ![presidebt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c37758/32.png) [@presidebt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/presidebt)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2003, 11:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-crackpot-theory-about-why-were-in-iraq/163628/3 "2003-03-23T23:53:46Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by JonScribe \* > \*\*once we have a friendly government in charge in Iraq \*\* Your post was interesting, but I don’t think there will be a friendly Iraqi government after Hussein is deposed. If true democracy reigns (yeah, riiiiight) it is more than likely that a hardline, anti-American government could easily be elected. It could be even worse, a terrorist friendly, radical Islamic government could easily become a faction in the new government, if not the controlling power. \I wish we’d just get off the top of the hill so we wouldn’t have to worry so much about being knocked off it. We have the technology: level the hill! \ ---
**Author:** ![green\_dragon\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/13edae/32.png) [@green\_dragon\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/green_dragon_1)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2003, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-crackpot-theory-about-why-were-in-iraq/163628/4 "2003-03-24T01:12:39Z")
interesting, but I doubt it. At least you can think of A reason for us being there, which doesn’t involve our military forces firing on each other/crashing/colliding Shock and awe? At what? ---
**Author:** ![JonScribe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/3be4f8/32.png) [@JonScribe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JonScribe)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2003, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-crackpot-theory-about-why-were-in-iraq/163628/5 "2003-03-24T03:22:28Z")
Just to add fuel to the fire, AP is reporting: "In gaining swift control of Iraq’s southern oil fields and terminals, U.S.-led forces have put the country on a course to again becoming one of the world’s petroleum powers, experts agree. “After 20 years in decline following wars with Iran and the United States, Iraq’s oil industry could emerge within several years as a potential rival to Saudi Arabia’s oil dominance, the experts say, as well as a fulcrum of future energy politics for the United States, Europe and Asia.” **presidebt** , I don’t see the U.S. allowing any other form of government than one it considers friendly and certainly not an Islamic-controlled one. **Lissa** , thanks for the links, but if Iraq can become a petroleum power, as discussed above, that would seem to remove the need to maintain good relations with Saudi Arabia for the sake of stability of oil markets. ---
**Author:** ![presidebt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c37758/32.png) [@presidebt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/presidebt)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2003, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-crackpot-theory-about-why-were-in-iraq/163628/6 "2003-03-24T03:28:14Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by JonScribe \* > \*\* > > **presidebt** , I don’t see the U.S. allowing any other form of government than one it considers friendly and certainly not an Islamic-controlled one. > > \*\* Whoa. Even if it’s democratically elected? Doesn’t that solidly refute our argument that we’re “bringing democracy to the Iraqi people”? Circular argument, I tell ya, circular argument. ---
**Author:** ![JonScribe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/3be4f8/32.png) [@JonScribe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JonScribe)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2003, 4:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-crackpot-theory-about-why-were-in-iraq/163628/7 "2003-03-24T04:16:45Z")
Bush can call it what he wants, but it won’t be democracy. He’s not about to have gone to all this trouble to let anybody other than a hand-picked candidate run things. ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2003, 5:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/my-crackpot-theory-about-why-were-in-iraq/163628/8 "2003-03-24T05:54:59Z")
Well, there are also [accusations](http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/02/01/09_usa.html) of the Bush family’s personal ties to the Saudi government. > [@](#): > > How close are Bush family ties to Saudi Arabia? “Nowhere is the revolving U.S.-Saudi money wheel more evident than within President Bush’s own coterie of foreign policy advisers, starting with the president’s father, George H.W. Bush,” explains this [Boston] Herald expose’. (Again, no claims for veracity, but this is another allegation which I have seen much of.)