"AK" <someoneNasty@hotmails.com> wrote in message
news:pns1g0l9ilv4b4tj67n6dt44lsuuq7pnrd@4ax.com...

On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 10:09:51 GMT, "PBS" <pbsoftSP@Mbigpond.net.au> wrote:

Ok, so if that is the case, and lets assume it is ,
considering the dwindling world oil supplies, and the
possibility as some have suggested that the Iraqi oil supply is nearly
empty
do you think it was a shrewd decision to invade Iraq?

how much oil does Iraq have?

I heard the oil wells are nearly dry
In the good old days Iraq had around 8% of the worlds supply.
is that close to accurate?


One would think that the billions of US Dollars spent on the war , if for
oil, would of been better spent

Iraq has enough oil for the next 30 years. That's good enough.

As for billions spent on war and al the mess made, remember that they
didn't
expect the war to last this long. They were expecting that they would be
showered with flowers (Chalabi told them that) and war would be over in a
month.
They defeated Iraqi military and took over Baghdad in less than a month.
Everything was going according to their plan, but then something went
wrong,
i.e. Iraqi resistance. They never thought this would last this long.

Do you have your own opinions as to why this happened?
I'd be interested to read them.

I think, it was the disrespect and humility the Iraqis had to endure
I believe that an Arab man, in this case an Iraqi man, esp. one who has a
family , holds up honour
and respect more than he does his own life.

I read recently that an influential Iraqi tribal leader was quoted saying
that
it would be better to shoot our woman dead than for them to be taken for
interrogation by
the US/coalition.