A Casual Argument
The War in Iraq
There has been a lot of talk lately about the way the Bush administration has raised war against Iraq. Of course, the administration simply dismisses the rumors and tells the people that the reason for the war is that Iraq has been keeping weapons for mass destruction.
The conspiracy issue is: U.S. rampaged through Iraq to claim for itself the richness of the foreign country. It has not been the issue of weapons for mass destruction, it’s the oil of Iraq that U.S. is really after. This issue is quite obvious if it is given some thought.
Iraq is the world’s second largest oil producing country, and the U.S. government has been eyeing that oil since the beginning. They wanted to get their hands in those oil reserves to dominate the world market. Of course, once they were able to dominate the market for oil, those involved in this would have lots of money. They can manipulate oil prices around the world.
Think of it this way, it is the U.S. government that always starts issues against countries that “they” think as trying to start war on other countries, especially U.S. But they are the only ones that think of it this way. There are lots of countries that produce and export weapons of mass destruction or at least the material needed to produce WMD, but why only strike Iraq? North Korea for example, has always been stubborn about its nuclear facilities that U.S. government says have been used to produce WMD, the government tried to make them bow before them, but they failed. Iraq on the other hand, let them interfere with its sovereignty, and allowed U.S. government to check up on them every once in a while, and yet the U.S. attacked them.
In the 1990s, there was the Gulf war. It started when Kuwait defiantly rejected negotiations with Iraq. The negotiations were to make Kuwait lower its oil production and increase its oil price, which is making the Iraq government lose billion in revenue, and let Iraq pass through the Persian Gulf, otherwise with use its military force against Kuwait. Kuwait, which is a country 10 times smaller that Iraq refuses to negotiate.
One would be left thinking: Why would Kuwait start an argument that can lead to war against a country more powerful than itself? A possible answer to that is this: U.S. must have already made negotiations with Kuwait that if a possible war broke out between Iraq and itself it would be able to get support from U.S. This can explain why they have been so defiant in the first place. The event may seem coincidental, but what an unfortunate coincidence! During those times, Iraq was experiencing de facto sanctions from western countries added to the list of over production of oil by Kuwait. Another add to this was the fact that U.S. revamped its doctrines form U.S. – Soviet conflict target to regional powers instead.
In recent times, U.S. accused Iraq of harboring WMD that it will use against U.S., again there was no evidence depicting to this. Even the U.N. said that: “The United Nations team of international weapons experts in Iraq have confirmed that there is “no evidence” whatsoever to support the American and British claims that the Iraqi regime was hiding or planning to build weapons of mass destruction. The official UN weapons inspectors (UNMOVIC) were responsible for verifying the disarmament process in Iraq but were forced to leave when the US and UK started the war.” (The Insider, 2003)
Of course, there is still the chance that what the government is true. But, where are the evidences that should point to this truth? If the allegations are true, shouldn’t the U.S. and U.K. governments seek advice first from U.N., then try to prepare negotiations before acting on its own accord? And why is it that even their soldiers feel that there is no truth to the reason for the war?
A country claiming to be for peace, should be trying all non-violent solutions before taking the matters into their own hands. From a closer look, it can be seen that Iraqi people really do need to feel that they are free. That they need help to get them out of a situation that will be eternally theirs if no one helps them bring down their dictator.
But, why did the U.S. government initiate the attacks? It is known to every country, that no other country can interfere with their government because it will be intrusion to a country’s sovereignty. Given this, President Bush still continued with his “advocacy” to free the people of Iraq from their ruler of more than 20 years.
Maybe the reason why these conspiracy theory was raised is because, despite the help and support that U.S. and U.K. got from third world countries, they are trying to monopolize the reconstruction of Iraq. When they knew that the reason they got the support of other nations is for the jobs that the reconstruction will bring to their people. Should there have been, a written contract for jobs to people from other countries, will the U.S. accept their support? This writer thinks that it is very unlikely that they will accept any contract that will compromise their hold on Iraq.
There are a lot of reasons why U.S. would want to dominate Iraq. Other than those already mentioned, there is still the move of Iraq in 2001 of dumping the US dollar for multilateral Euro. Should this move have prevailed, it would have endangered the U.S. economy in such a way that the dollar and euro would switch roles in the global economy and the U.S. would experience a third world crisis scenario.
There may be another reason for all this, a reason that has not yet been uncovered. But the government’s interest in Iraq is not just a “now” thing. It has been there in the 1970s when U.S. oil companies exploited Iraq’s oil; it was also there in the 1990s, when the gulf war exploded; and today, when finally the long awaited victory for the United States government has been claimed. The leader they were not able to persuade was captured for reasons that are still unknown, except for the obvious yet suspicious ones. The country they want to exploit to increase their personal wealth was claimed. And now, they want to try Hussein in their own country, where is the justice in that? And they appointed someone they could control. Why did they do that? Is it hard to let the people practice their right to vote now that they are free? It is sad, that a country known to be peace loving engages in such barbaric acts. Even if it is not for the money, they shouldn’t have done this. Lives are at stake in this kind of action. If it is really peace that they wanted, why didn’t they opt for a more peaceful solution to this problem?
Reference:
The Insider Report. (2003). U.N. Confirms: No WMD in Iraq. U.S.A.: Acheson Intelligence Group. para. 1
This report shows the other side of a story. It offers theories that can help clear a persons mind of doubt about an issue.
Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment