Why did America invade Iraq?
- To steal Iraqâs oil distribution rights.
- Because of WMDs, terrorists in Iraq, "evil" Saddam, to create democracy, and/or stop radical Muslims.
- To create jobs for Halliburton, profits for oil companies, revenge for Daddy Bush, to further neo-con ventures, and/or to aid Christian missionary work.
- Some combination of the second and third option.
- Another reason â please specify.
We have now been in Iraq over 3.5 years.
After all this time, it truly amazes me how current events of the time leading up to the invasion can still be glossed over and never pieced together to reveal the missing picture that puzzles so many in the public, a picture that every Senate Intelligence Committee member has taped to his/her office wall. 
In remembrance âŠ
The time of oil sanctions against Saddam was comming to an end.
During the time of sanctions America, Britain, et al continued to receive Iraqi oil, and Saddam was forbidden to cut new-partner deals.
Thus Californiaâs refineries mercifully continued to receive the special sweet Iraqi crude that they are geared to refine, Iraqi crude that on any given production day accounts for from between 8 to 28 percent of the oil refined in California, Iraqi crude accounting for nearly 20 percent of the imported crude oil refined in California.
I say mercifully, because the loss of that oil would have been economically catastrophic. Different âflavorsâ and grades of crude are used for different processes. Only Iraq has the available special light sweet crude Californiaâs refineries need for the processes they perform. Retooling a refinery to refine a different crude and for a different process is so tremendously cost-prohibitive that it is considered practically impossible. And the processes that would have been curtailed from losing the special sweet Iraqi crude would have so damaged Californiaâs economy that the ripple effect would have sent the entire country into a recession ⊠or worse ⊠and as the other âindustrializedâ nations know, whatâs bad for America is also bad for them.
But as Chinaâs need for oil increased, and Russia needed cheap Chinese goods, talks among their leaders and Saddam began to develop.
Then, near the end of sanctions, France began the process of brokering a deal that, as soon as the oil sanctions lifted and Saddam could once again choose his own trading partners, would send Iraqi crude to China, cheap Chinese goods to Russia, and Russian weapons to Iraq, with France accruing some oil benies as well.
But the problem was that Saddam didnât have a lot of âspareâ oil to complete the deal to meet the massive Chinese consumption needs.
Now when they heard about this deal in the works, it was bothersome enough to Bush and the neo-con gang that China would be getting the oil it needed to be a superpower, so they warned Saddam not to do so.
But when a still-disgruntled Saddam recieved GWBâs fuel-to-the-fire warning, well, not surprisingly, he âannouncedâ that it was âhisâ decision, and, if need be, he would simply divert Californiaâs Iraqi crude to China!
Of course the U.S. warned Saddam that doing so would suffer him some very âstiffâ consequences ⊠to which Saddam replied with the middle digit ⊠and the four-way negotiations intensified between Iraq, China, and Russia as brokered by France.
The die was then cast. America had to prevent the loss of Californiaâs Iraqi crude, no matter what. And Saddam could no longer be âreasonedâ with.
But Bush and the gang knew that if they told the truth about why they were going to invade Iraq, an invasion The Pentagon knew would cost scores of thousands of Iraqi civilians their very lives, that he would be impeached if not cause America to be invaded by a U.N. army.
So, he lied. He lied to the American people and to the rank and file of Congress, telling the truth only to the Senate Security Committe who voted in the majority to support the Bush plan and use Bushâs suggested red herrings as the false reasons for the invasion, keeping the truth from the rank and file of Congress and the public, the truth that every world leader now knows: that America invaded solely to steal Iraqâs oil distribution rights to prevent the loss of Americaâs âshareâ of Iraqi crude, a loss that would have plunged America into a devastating but not life-threatening depression.
So the WMD, terrorist activity, and âbrutal despotâ red herring social issues, etc. were contrived and played to the American public ⊠and with support from these red herring diversions America marched into Iraq, slaughtered scores of thousands of Iraqis including helpless little children and their defenseless parents ⊠to steal Iraqâs oil distribution rights under the guise of âliberationâ.
Bush and the gang now hope that an Iraqi âdemocracyâ (read: capitalist) government can be easily as indirectly controllable as a directly controlled dictator ⊠though that remains to be seen.
Regardless, the only reason America went to âwarâ with Iraq was to steal their oil distribution rights, and for no other reason, as the recent CIA reports âadmittingâ there were never any WMDs or Iraqi-sanctioned terrorist activities in Iraq at the feared times have confirmed. Considering that other nations, especially in Africa, have a âreputationâ of genocidal behavior and we havenât âintervenedâ there, and considering that these nations have nothing we want â such as the special light sweet crude oil that Iraq has â it is now obvious beyond any shadow of reasonable doubt that the Iraq war was merely an oil grab, and nothing more.
Yet despite all the separate articles in the offline and online papers back then about the special sweet Iraqi crude, Californiaâs refineries and their needs, the Iraqi oil we were getting, the international deals being discussed pending sanction lifting, etc., etc., all the way up to and including the more recent discrediting of the contrived CIA âintelligenceâ, few if any have any energy left in the matter to admit to the horror of what truly obviously happened and why.
And that is truly sad, because the truth, which is as I state it, is burried into the realm of âconspiracy theoryâ in the minds of those who just canât admit that Bush lied to them and pulled one over on their ego, and all Bush had to do to keep the truth so hidden ⊠was to simply lie. His status as President would cause so many people to âbelieveâ him, no matter what.
But the truth remains, America chose that the crises management difficulties and the cost of the crises themselves that would be caused by Californiaâs and the rest of the countryâs loss of the special light sweet Iraqi crude and the associated international repercussions far outweighed the cost of the âwarâ ⊠and the lives of the Iraqiâs who would be slaughtered in the heist.
Did America do the right thing ⊠or not.
As the facts are assembled, history will decide.
And that is hopefully preferable ⊠to nuclear-armed âterroristsâ making that decision in place of historians. 
⊠
