Iraq civil war = a good thing! Don't you GET it?

[Th1onein]

You know, it strikes me as strange that anyone would think that an Iraqi Civil War is something that the Bush administration doesn't want. Think about it. They don't give a shit if the Iraqis kill each other! The more the better! That way, we're left with their oil! That's all we ever wanted in the first place. If the country descends into civil war, that's a good thing! Less of them we have to detain and/or kill, don't you see?

[Jara sang]

1. indeed, good point.

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

2. It's a powder keg even they can't contain. If the country splinters,

into a Kurdistan, a Shiite country and Sunni country it will have far-reaching implications within the Arab world and beyond. Even these assholes aren't delusional enough to think they can contain that rupture.

[stop the bleeding]

3. never ending wars = never ending military production machine =

big business = ultimate control over all people through fear, money and power - yep the neocons would like to have 3 Iraqs if they could

[onenote]

4. iraq civil war = defeat for repug candidates

Public sentiment for the war is dropping and the further that Iraq descends into chaos, the more the public will come to realize that chimpy and his crowd not only didn't know what they were doing when they invaded Iraq but they also didn't know what to do once they got there. And that spells trouble for the repugs in November. Plus, if we can barely secure their oil fields now, how can we secure them in the event of all out civil war?

onenote

[tatertop]

8. None of this will matter in November

The republicans will still control the vote,
the government, the airwaves.
The people have been lifted out of the process.

[cali]

12. Sheesh, more codswallop.

Civil War in Iraq negates any control over the vote that the repub arguably have. The airwaves, largely corporate rather than republican, still report the disaster that is Iraq. The electorate was closely divided in the last election, whether or not repubs manipulated the vote in some small number of states, and this is shaping up to be a tsunami.

[cali]

5. Codswallop.

Production of oil in the midst of a full blown civil war is a near impossibility. Look how difficult it's been with only a low level civil war. As I wrote in another thread, I think bushco's motives more closely match my analysis:


"bushboy is a meglomaniacal simpleton with delusions of grandeur who's obsessed with his presidential legacy. He had a quasi messianic vision that by invading Iraq he could remake the mideast in his own delusional version of democracy. Sure that included control of oil and goodies for cronies, but I'd argue that the overarching sensibility is one of a man who wants to be seen as a transfigurative world leader. Now tell me why my analysis isn't plausible.
(BTW, I think delusions of the sort that bush harbors are far more powerful than mere greed and corruption)"

[CJCRANE]

6. But then the oil price goes up, Saudis make more profits

and Bushco wins again!

[cali]

11. Think a little deeper.

bushco wins nothing from a civil war, and nothing from skyrocketing oil prices. How on earth are the republicans going to spin a tanked economy, civil war in Iraq and increasing instability in the mideast?
Now how about really addressing my analysis.

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

7. Love your analysis and would also add:

“They were careless people, Tom and Daisy — they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made…”

Francis Scott Fitzgerald - The Great Gatsby

[tatertop]

9. I like that quote

[cali]

10. Thank you. And may I add that I love your choice of

quotes.