US troop build up secures oil supplies
Sitting duck | 13.01.2003 18:22
Is (immediate) war with Iraq the real objective? This is not a well-thought out article, just a rushed contemplation (so you'll have to excuse me for not stating exact numbers or sources, coz i cant remember, but trust me, there out there on the internet.)
Is the threat of war against Iraq merely a pretense for a larger armed presence in the middle east? As with most articles posted on Indymedia, I have no hard evidence, only speculation, but just think about it:
*Official US think-tanks have long stressed the strategic importance of an increased military presence in the gulf region.
*Troop numbers in the region are being increased by more than double current levels (from 60,000 to 150,000).
*The US and UK still insist that war with Iraq is not definite.
*What would be the cost of sending almost a 100,000 extra personnel and equipment half way across the world, only to send them home again unused?
*Let's assume that Bush and blair aren't completely stupid. They know the political cost of starting a war without evidence of provocation and without the public's consent.
In my opinion, either war with Iraq is certain, or MAYBE THE US IS PLANNING TO BACK DOWN FROM THE CURRENT CONFLICT, ONLY TO SAY THAT THE TROOPS WILL STAY "JUST IN CASE" SADDAM TRIES SOMETHING.
Why would the US want a large military presence in such an oil-rich and politically unstable region? Hmmm?
Say hello to 21st century diplomacy.
(DISCLAIMER: This is just something that occurred to me today and I felt like sharing it, so don't bother trying to pick too many holes in my argument or the haphazard way in which it is written).
*Official US think-tanks have long stressed the strategic importance of an increased military presence in the gulf region.
*Troop numbers in the region are being increased by more than double current levels (from 60,000 to 150,000).
*The US and UK still insist that war with Iraq is not definite.
*What would be the cost of sending almost a 100,000 extra personnel and equipment half way across the world, only to send them home again unused?
*Let's assume that Bush and blair aren't completely stupid. They know the political cost of starting a war without evidence of provocation and without the public's consent.
In my opinion, either war with Iraq is certain, or MAYBE THE US IS PLANNING TO BACK DOWN FROM THE CURRENT CONFLICT, ONLY TO SAY THAT THE TROOPS WILL STAY "JUST IN CASE" SADDAM TRIES SOMETHING.
Why would the US want a large military presence in such an oil-rich and politically unstable region? Hmmm?
Say hello to 21st century diplomacy.
(DISCLAIMER: This is just something that occurred to me today and I felt like sharing it, so don't bother trying to pick too many holes in my argument or the haphazard way in which it is written).
Sitting duck
Comments
Display the following 2 comments