Who Benefited from the Iraq War?

[pattylou]

I know some of you are tired of this. Anyway, I saw this on another website and was curious for your input. Accurate? Total spin? Too simplistic? Pretty close but not quite? Actually, I think I'll make part of it a poll.

Over 100,000 innocent civilians killed by US forces.
Almost 2,000 US soldiers killed.
5,000 US soldiers seriously injured (lost limbs, etc).
Terrorist threat to the US 1,000 times greater than it was before the invasion.
Thirty million Al Qaeda supporters (compared with a few hundred before the invasion).
Iraq on the verge of civil war.
No government, no agreement on a Constitution.
Level of violence in Iraq worsening every day.
Islamic funtamentalists gaining control.
No WMD found.

Poll question: Who or what has benefited from the invasion of Iraq? See choices in poll box.

 

[BobG]

Well, so far the results seem to accurately reflect who's benefited - 0% across the board.

 

[Burnsys]

You forget to put as an option:

Weapon Manufacturers and The carlyle group

 

[russ_watters]

Where did you get that quote, pattylou, and how do you substantiate things like a 1000x worse terrorst threat?

 

[Pengwuino]

Weapon Manufacturers and The carlyle group

Exactly Mr. Moore!

 

[Archon]

Exactly Mr. Moore!

Wait, you don't think that weapons manufacturers benefit from a war? Uh...

 

[Gokul43201]

patty : you skipped a big one - IRAN !

 

[devil-fire]

i put a conditional vote for iraqi people depending on how things turn out. if americans leave before the job gets done, that'll be bad for the iraqi people, otherwise i think it will be good for them in the long run.

 

[vanesch]

patty : you skipped a big one - IRAN !

I don't really think that Iran, as a nation, won much. The hardline religious leaders did win, yes (just as Al Quaida which got my vote). But the slow movement towards a less repressive theocracy which had started came to a grinding halt because everybody over there got mobilized to avoid a US invasion, which played out for the theocrats. You could call it "the reverse domino effect"

I even didn't vote for Haliburton, because of course they got a lot of US TAXPAYER money, but I don't know if they are really MAKING a lot of money in Iraq. Maybe I'm wrong there, though.

 

[Anttech]

ohhh "super Mentor" vanesch...

*Anttech watches his step*

 

[Polly]

Yeah vanesch is BRAINY.

(and Anttech's jokes are infectious )

 

[Bilal]

What about Israel and the Zionist strategy in Middle East?

How many times the American leaders said that this war is good for the Israeli security?

Did you check the background of the real planners of this war?

1). Richard Perle----One of Bush's foreign policy advisors, he is the chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board. A very likely Israeli government agent, Perle was expelled from Senator Henry Jackson's office in the 1970's after the National Security Agency (NSA) caught him passing Highly- classified (National Security) documents to the Israeli Embassy. He later worked for the Israeli weapons firm, Soltam. Perle is one of the leading pro-Israeli fanatics leading this Iraq war mongering within the administration and now in the media.

2). Paul Wolfowitz----Deputy Defense Secretary, and member of Perle's Defense Policy Board, in the Pentagon. Wolfowitz is a close associate of Perle, and reportedly has close ties to the Israeli military. His sister lives in Israel. Wolfowitz is the number two leader within the administration behind this Iraq war mongering.

3). Douglas Feith----Under Secretary of Defense and Policy Advisor at the Pentagon. He is a close associate of Perle and served as his Special Counsel. Like Perle and the others, Feith is a pro-Israel extremist, who has advocated anti-Arab policies in the past. He is closely associated with the extremist group, the Zionist Organization of America, which even attacks Jews that don't agree with its extremist views. Feith frequently speaks at ZOA conferences. Feith runs a small law firm, Feith and Zell, which only has one
International office, in Israel. The majority of their legal work is representing Israeli interests. His firm's own website stated, prior to his appointment, that Feith "represents Israeli Armaments Manufacturer." Feith basically represents the Israeli War Machine. Feith, like Perle and Wolfowitz, are campaigning hard for this Israeli proxy war against Iraq.

4). Edward Luttwak----Member of the National Security Study Group of the Department of Defence at the Pentagon. Luttwak is reportedly an Israeli citizen and has taught in Israel. He frequently writes for Israeli and pro-Israeli newspapers and journals. Luttwak is an Israeli extremist whose main theme in many of his articles is the necessity of the U.S. waging war against Iraq.

Now Israel is the strongest country in ME and the only country that have nuclear weapons... Iraq is the strategic depth of Syria since decades, so destruction of this country converts Syria to weak country in front of Israel.

 

[Townsend]

...snip...

Congratulations on becoming a super mentor. I think they made a good choice.

 

[Burnsys]

Wait, you don't think that weapons manufacturers benefit from a war? Uh...

if Mr. Moore says 2+2 = 4 then it is 5 for Bush Fans.

 

[Smurf]

I didn't want to vote for anybody but from lack of good options I sufficed to say Halliburton and their shareholders - although I doubt they made much more than most.

 

[Skyhunter]

Al Quaida.

Afghanistan was such a success in bleeding the former Soviet Union dry, that they are repeating the strategy against the U.S.

 

[Anttech]

1 Hailburton
2 Al Quaeda
3 US Army

Reason,
1 Money Money Mo money
2 As Skyhunter said, Al Quaeda have the US by the balls in Iraq
3 Massive military spending so Money Money Money

Loosers?

Every othe option, bar freedom of speach.. Not relevent

 

[Informal Logic]

There are votes for the American people? I am really at a loss on that one. I can only suppose there is still a belief that democracy will spread (very unlikely), and when it does, it will benefit Americans (even inadvertently, this is a questionable philosophy). But this is a hope, not a fact, so how can this be selected at this time? Other than that, are people reading the OP?

Over 100,000 innocent civilians killed by US forces.
Almost 2,000 US soldiers killed.
5,000 US soldiers seriously injured (lost limbs, etc.)

Add to that the economic consequences ($450 billion?), which have contributed to record debt to foreign countries.
http://www.keinkrieg.ch/downloads/article_nordhaus_cost_iraq.pdf
http://www.wsr.ac.at/~sts/down/author/Nordhaus_02_Iraq.pdf

The second article dated 2002 warns of these things, including the US becoming a pariah in the world. How does this benefit the American people??!

In the meantime, there is ample evidence that Al Queda has grown in size and skill since the invasion – per the OP “Thirty million Al Qaeda supporters (compared with a few hundred before the invasion)” and per other threads, at the minimum we know Halliburton won no bid contracts. Come on people, this is an academic forum. If you do not have evidence for something, why are you voting for it?

 

[SOS2008]

OR...they still believe there was a threat from WMD and Saddam blew up the WTC? (No doubt a result of people watching Faux News. )

 

[pattylou]

Where did you get that quote, pattylou, and how do you substantiate things like a 1000x worse terrorst threat?

It's from another message board, the particular person who posted it is outspoken to say the least.

I have no idea of the accuracy of the 1000X assessment. I am not even sure how we measure that. I do know that global terrorism is up almost an order of magnitude since our response to 9/11, which seems relevant to me but may not seem relevant to you.

Thank you for your feedback, Russ.

 

[ray b]

OIL CORPs

just where is the Iraq oil going
and how much is the now limited production effecting prices

about a billion barrels are now off the market thanks to this war
and very little is being done to expand production

prewar they were sending far more oil out even if under limited condisions

 

[Gokul43201]

I don't really think that Iran, as a nation, won much. The hardline religious leaders did win, yes (just as Al Quaida which got my vote). But the slow movement towards a less repressive theocracy which had started came to a grinding halt because everybody over there got mobilized to avoid a US invasion, which played out for the theocrats. You could call it "the reverse domino effect"

Oh, I meant the leadership in Iran...not the people. For starters, most of the elected politicians in Iraq are now (Iran-style) Shiites who don't really care for secularism. Many of these people were, in fact, exiled in Iran while Saddam was in power. They've built strong and close ties to Tehran.