We invaded Iraq because of the lies Bush fed us that they had WMD's

[NNN0LHI]

Which means the USA screwed up badly. Now, someone tell me something. If I were to agree that we need to stay until we rebuild that country that we blew up to smithereens because of Bush's lies, why should we be using the Iraqi's oil to pay for the rebuilding? Because Bush lied and said they had WMD's and they atually did not shouldn't we be the ones paying for the rebuilding costs? Why should the Iraqi's continue to pay for Bush's lies? Does this sound right to you? Can someone answer these questions?

Don

[Don_G]

1. I Can't

Which is one reason they're fighting us tooth-and-nail; to retain enough of their oil and infrastructure so they can rebuild after we're driven back into the US.

[murphymom]

2. You're absolutely right

The old rule is "you break it, you buy it". That's why it's so galling, especially to those of us who opposed the war from the start. We shouldn't be paying for this abomination (because we shouldn't have gone to war) but since our "government" got us into this mess we should take responsibility for it.

[Parche]

3. Answers

Well once upon a time the Republicans are evil
THE END

[LittleDannySlowhorse]

4. Me neither

The whole thing is bullshit, and always was. If the Iraqis ultimately end up having a better life with Saddam Hussein out of power that would be great, but I wouldn't count on it, and until the moment I see otherwise, I must declare my feeling that there was no aspect of this whole sorry enterprise that isn't a complete waste of human lives.

[Toby109]

5. Not really but here goes:

As much as I hate to EVER agree w/ this maladministration, the US is now obligated to rebuild Iraq, IMHO. Not only that but we should also make an effort to recompense those Iraqis who lost either property or loved ones during this Mesopotamian Cluster Fuck.

[NNN0LHI]

6. That was not my question. Because of Bush's screwup...

...why should the Iraqi's have to pay for it with their own money from their own oil? That is my question.

Don

[dixiechiken]

8. They're NOT ... we are.

Aren't we?

[NNN0LHI]

9. We are paying for it with the Iraqi peoples own money...

...from selling oil that belongs to the Iraqi's.

Don

[Bombtrack]

17. no we aren't, the 87 billion is our money

the people who wanted the Iraqis to pay were mostly democrats

[NNN0LHI]

22. Then where is all of the oil money going? Can you show me? n/t

[Bombtrack]

31. Iraqi services

and I didn't audit them so I can't show you.

But if you were paying attention it was the not the administration that wanted there to be a loan

[NNN0LHI]

40. Of course you have not audited the books

Perhaps because there are no books to audit? Why would that be do you think?

And if you had been paying attention you may have noticed that it was the Bush administration that wanted to invade Iraq to begin with.

Don

[Bombtrack]

41. really? I thought that was canada

you're still not making a coherant point

[NNN0LHI]

42. Perhaps the whole subject is a little too deep for you. See ya n/t

[NNN0LHI]

23. $64.7 billion dollars of that is to pay for our troops to be there 1 year

All the while the Iraqi's oil is being stolen and sold by us at our price.

Do

[Toby109]

18. Sorry, my fault

I think we agree actually. The Iraqis should not have to pay for reconstruction with oil revenues. I was under the impression that that was one of the major sticking points in the 87 billion debate. Should the money alloted for rebuilding be in the form of a grant or loan? The loan to be repaid with oil money.

[Bombtrack]

20. Bush is AGAINST making the Iraqi's pay

the author of the thread seems to be confused

[LittleDannySlowhorse]

43. Sorry

I apologize for abusing your question and basically treating it as a jumping-off point for me to start bitching about the war. I hang around on only one other message board besides this one, and everyone there supports the war. It's a music board with people who are mostly between 20 and 30, and listening to their ignorant bullshit on a constant basis is enough to make you swing viciously between suicidal depression and apopleptic rage. So when I'm here I'm very easily set off on this subject and just tear into rants that are only tangentially related to the question at hand. My apologies.

Anyway, to answer your question, they shouldn't have to. There is no logical or moral reason.

[Liberal_Andy]

7. Repealing the obscene tax cut would pay for it...

just the cut for the top 1% would do it. And yes, we broke it, it's on us.

Now, if we were to start acting as adults, and ask the world to join us (the UN), maybe more would be willing to share the burden.

But that's not part of the PNAC plans.

[salinen]

11. This country better

allow Iraqis and Afghanis to emigrate here soon. It's only fair.

[Bombtrack]

10. even France and Germany acknowledge they had WMD

the question that needs to be asked, and both the obsessivly pro and anti-war won't admit hasn't been proven either way, is whether invasion was the right and necessary method to deprive Iraq of means, reason, or disposition to be hostile.

[NNN0LHI]

12. France and Germany did not invade and occupy Iraq. The USA did n/t

[Bombtrack]

16. And that contradicts my correction how?

I don't think there's anyone who doesn't know who did and didn't fight the war

[Dirk39]

26. When? Who?

Hello from Germany,
I'm not convinced that our government had so nobel reasons to not support the invasion, as many people seem to think, but I never heard that the german governments believed the Iraq had WMDs. Till the last day, they supported the weapon inspectors and demanded them, to continue their work. Or did I miss somehting?
Dirk

[Scott Lee]

13. This is classic occupation fascism

It goes like this "well we may have been wrong. But look, we need to stay now because of this mess." Then they go on to broadcast your agreement with the need to stay as "support for the troops" which is then reformulated in the media as support for Asshole's war policy.

I can't believe so many Americans have fallen for this.

[imhotep]

14. i dont feel any obligation

Im not paying for Bush's fuck ups.

[NNN0LHI]

15. But the Iraqi's should? n/t

[dixiechiken]

25. But again, they're NOT paying for it ...

We are ... with our tax $$$. Not one penny of the $20 Billion (of the total $87 Billion) earmarked for reconstruction of Iraq was put through as a loan ... it was ALL a "grant" (or whatever the hell you wanna call it).

And even if some feel as though the responsibility lies with the US to "rebuild" Iraq, is it really necessary that we "rebuild" everything as "top-of-the-line"??? Or "state-of-the-art"??? Is it necessary to rebuild for that country things that we, ourselves, don't even have???

[NNN0LHI]

27. Then tell me. Where is all of the oil money going then?

If you give 18.6 billion to rebuild but then steal 50 billion dollars worth of oil from them how are we paying for anything?

Don

http://www.msnbc.com/news/981452.asp?cp1=1

<snip>LION’S SHARE GOES FOR MILITARY NEEDS
The bill includes $64.7 billion for U.S. military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. The money includes everything from salaries owed reservists called to active duty to buying aircraft parts, missiles and thousands of extra sets of body armor for ground troops.

In the starkest departure from Bush’s proposal, there is $18.6 billion — $1.7 billion below the president’s plan — for retooling Iraq’s economy and government.

more

[Bombtrack]

19. You're confused, the people who wanted the reconstruction to be a loan

were democrats mostly.

You share the administrations position on this issue. but you seem to be clouded in you anger

[Dirk39]

21. You're a racist!

Hello from Germany,
"shouldn't we be the ones paying for the rebuilding costs?" - No, supposing that you were talking of THE northamericans. Expropriate those , who were behind the invasion, expropriate those, who supported Bush. Believe me, they have enough money. BTW, is Murdoch an U.S. citizen? If a small invasion is necessary, I support our troops!
Dirk

[guajira]

24. Many DU'ers Never bought the WMD Lies!!

I recall many threads where we stated that B* wanted Iraq for the oil and revenge. I don't recall anyone here worrying about the US being in any danger from Iraq!!

[opihimoimoi]

28. Someday, one of those smart Iraqs will take us to court and sue the shit

out of Bush/USA.

And guess what?

They got grounds and most likely will win.

We will end up paying trillion$.

Bush and the Pubs are losers and they gonna take us down with them.

Damn

The court is in the Hague and we are a signatory member bound by the rules. Bush has put us in a litigious predicament.

[maggrwaggr]

29. what do you mean by "they"?

You seriously think the Iraqi people will see a dime of their oil money?

Do you see any of the oil money from oil pumped in the United States?

No, I didn't think so.

Who do you think is going to pump and sell that oil? Big multinational oil companies, that's who.

And you're gonna buy it.

[oasis]

30. Hans Blix should pay.His inability to find WMD left Chimpy without options

[Fleshdancer]

32. WMD???

We went there for WMD? Gee, I almost forget since the Bush admin and the media no longer talk about that.

Remember when the neocons would blabber on and on about how "its only been 3 months", "its only been 6 months" and "Iraq is a big country, it's going to take time to find the WMD". Funny how they're avoiding the subject all together now.

[opihimoimoi]

33. Its THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS

All Quiet on the Western Front, Forever Hold Your Peace, and Farme Le Booosh.

come, we go cliff diving

[oasis]

34. "Operation Iraqi Freedom" The Bushitas knew there were no WMD.

[chelaque liberal]

35. It's complicated, isn't it?

Yes, we invaded Iraq because of the lies Bush fed us. I feel a responsibility (and shame) for what was done in my name, but I don't feel responsible for Bush. We didn't elect him, a lot of us didn't believe his lies, and strongly opposed his war. We are victims of Bush too.

[ex_jew]

36. The U.S. WILL pay !

As a *direct* result of our Iraqi adventure, the U.S. will be diminished to a shadow of its former hegemonic self. Very likely Israel will cease to exist, for one small thing. If we ourselves avoid dissolution no one else will waste time asking our approval on anything important. The U.S. will be pushed back across the board in every area you can imagine. Attacking a pretend threat and then failing to subdue it means curtains for the whole shebang.

Here we are today, with

No manufacturing

IT disappearing

No savings

Unbelievable debt

No working political system

All U.S. forces tied down in a quagmire.

(and of course the big one) no ENERGY resources of our own

Iraq simply set fire to the whole rotten edifice of lies. Look out below !

[Dirk39]

37. Do you think it was the cause, or rather...

a desperate attempt, to prove the opposite?
Many people in Europe believe that the invasion in Iraq was rather a desperate attempt to show the world that the USA is still needed. Producing nothing but dollars, it seems that if the investions from outside would stop, the US economy would simply collapse. It's an airbulb. And if the USA can't convince the rest of the world that the military power of the USA is needed, the investions will stop and change to the Euro. But instead of showing the strenght of the US military, they did just invade a defenseless country, and they can't even "win" there. It's more like a dying dinosaur, who's beating wild around himself as he dies.
A lot of experts in Europe look at the USA this way. Me, personally, I'm really not sure - and I don't say this, to hide my own opinion behind some "experts". But the Iraq seems to speak for this hypothesis.
If the investions stop, the USA would lose 20% of their wealth from one day to the other. And the whole oil-thing is just a stupid joke from Bush and his comrades. Yes, the USA needs oil, but it needs everything else too, cause it's producing nothing, it's just consuming.
Dirk

[ex_jew]

38. I guess it was just a matter of time before the American era ended

but bad manners certainly hastened our eviction from the party.

I suspect that "peak oil" makes last-minute maneuvers to retain "supremacy" entirely meaningless. There won't enough be enough food to nourish the historians who might otherwise be able to answer your question.

Nice talking with you !

[Dirk39]

39. I pray for England, not to change to the Euro,

'cause I don't wanna see you hungry...
There's a lot of hypocracy in Europe, too. And there might be a lot of people here, who had and have honorable reasons to oppose the war as there are many northamericans, who opposed the war for the same reasons.
And although, the arguments seem to make sense to me: one of the most popular works in Europe is Emmanuel Todds book: "After the Empire: The Breakdown of the American Order", I don't like the "tone" of this criticism. The americans don't like to work, they just consume. Fine with me, I love them for this. They are communists, without knowing it. The americans don't like to die in a war. Fine with me, there can't be anything, I admire more (This argument works mostly like: they have all the hitech, but they loose on the ground). It's like Hitler, who told a japanese diplomat 1941: do you think an armee of soldiers, who just believe in the dollar, will ever go to the end?
If I have to make a decision, I rather go with the dollar (print some for me!)
Hello from Germany,
Dirk

[bpilgrim]

44. because... we're BROKE

not to mention RUTHLESS

peace

[weasel]

45. You invaded Iraq because of the lies Bush fed you that they had WMD's?

That's funny. In the UK we're told that WMDs were not an issue of great importance in the US, where the "War on Terrorism is seen justification enough fo the Iraqi invasion.

[opihimoimoi]

46. WElcome to the Madness, Weasel, of changing stories/reasons

by the Republican Party of the USA