Maybe it is all about the oil..

[Steve]

...not for the U.S., though.

"Experts of the Russian cabinet of ministers calculated that Russian loss of profit in Iraq made up 40 billion dollars, plus eight billion dollars of the Iraqi debt. The new Iraqi government is not likely to acknowledge that. Oil prices will go down, when Baghdad surrenders. This will cause incredible damage to the Russian budget. Before the war, Russia gained two billion dollars a year within the scope of the international program Oil for Food. That money has been lost too."

Taken from here (http://english.pravda.ru/economics/2003/03/26/45028.html).

Fifty billion dollars or so doesn't sound like a lot, in terms of the U.S. economy.  To the Russians, though, with their economy still struggling to overcome years of state-run programs and existing, rampant corruption, it means a lot.  Factor into that the fact that, with the right expertise, Russia probably has enough oil reserves to be a net exporter, which means energy independence as well as an influx of foreign currency and, well, it's a little more clear why Russia so vehemently opposes unilateral U.S. action in Iraq.

[jfcjrus]

Sure.
Russia - big money at stake here.

AND, when you concider 10-20 billion$ of Iraq debt to the French that will probably never be paid, their opposition to the operation becomes a bit clearer also.

Shall we look at the finances of Germany too?
My goodness, same thing!

Please pardon my abruptness, but all this information has been visable for a very long time. To be sure, economys will be affected.
Even in the USA.

But, IF this is the major reason that this war is being waged, or argued against, then I think we, as a species, are trully pathetic.

Perhaps the stated noble cause of freeing a peoples from the boot of an egotistical madman that also threatens our way of life in the USA is nothing but propaganda.
Perhaps the stated moral disagreements at the UN are indeed nothing more than various country's concern about their $'s.
The facts and figures are there, if anyone cares to look.
Could be.

I'd like to think different, but, with the current leaders of the nations today, who knows?

But, thanks for the info on how Russia stands to lose in this conflict. I'll add it to the pile.

Regards,

[Steve]

It would be nice to think that more than money is at stake.

But how does that old saying go? The hungry man cares only for his own belly?

Russia I can almost forgive, they're in pretty dire straits, these days, especially with the corruption problems.

But Germany, France, and others? Pure avarice!

[Misu]

jfcjrus - does a country trying to protect it's already screwed economy make it pathetic for humans to wage or oppose war?

I would say that humans are pathetic creatures, period. We've been blessed/cursed with sentience and emotion and empathy and large brains and opposable thumbs. Clearly, as history prooves, a dangerous combination. :nut:

[Domh]

I think it would be naive to assume that this war is only about liberating the Iraqi people from a brutally repressive regime and protecting Americans and American interests from growing threat posed by militant Islamic terrorism.

There is no such thing as a free lunch.

;)

[jfcjrus]

Originally posted by Misu
jfcjrus - does a country trying to protect it's already screwed economy make it pathetic for humans to wage or oppose war?

Good question!
(You do tend to cut through the retoric, and get to the meat, don't you ;) )
And, it's a hard question for me to equate to.
I'm an American. I'm not rich, but I'm doing ok.
I'm not suffering. I don't go to bed hungry.

So, I can afford to take the high moral ground and talk of freeing a peoples.
I can afford to talk about preventing a future threat to my country and my way of life.
I can afford to think this way because it really won't effect me one way or the other. I can afford to be a good guy.

But if I thought I, or my country, was going to experience a severe resession, or even a depression, due to this operation, well, how noble would I feel then?
I'm not sure.
Indeed, a good question.

But, as my situation is today, I have to come back to my origional point.
Due to this operation, peoples are dying here.
Their side and our side. Hundreds, perhaps thousands before it's done.
Folks that will never get a chance to grow old with their loved ones.
Will never, maybe, get a chance to groom their young to make this world a better place.
Their life, and their possible contribution is gone, forever.

So, although admittedly easy for me to say, I just think it's a pathetic reflection on our human race if this conflict is just about $'s.
To be free, to be generally able to live your life without anyone screwing with you....well ya, that's worth it.
That's worth dying to achieve, and protect.
But for $'s, for economys, for stock markets, for corporate profits, for 'the big picture'?
No, to me, that's pretty pathetic.
That doesn't say very much for our species.

So, as you you see, I just can't answer that really good question of yours.
Too much depends upon your plight in life, I guess.

But, I'm glad you asked.
Regards,

[Misu]

jfcjrus, I agree with your post, but to an extent.

I'm of the frame of mind that these people were going to die horrible deaths anyway, and at the hands of their leader. He's done it before, he'd do it again and again and again if allowed. Sure this war is going to cost many people their lives, but how many lives would it cost by not doing anything?

I really hate what-ifs, though. But I will say this - if we take into account the past, and accept that history tends to repeat itself, then we come to the conclusion that these people were headed for horrible deaths.

About the money - when I was younger, I used to think it was in such poor taste to wage wars over money - until I realized (because of life events) that money indeed makes the world go round. Money is the difference between a full belly and an empty one - between good health and being sick all the time. Whoever said money was the root of all evil had it right, because without money, you're in trouble. Life no longer is about "self-actualization" or "learning" or "becoming a better person" - it turns into a savage game of survival, one where you find yourself doing things you never imagined you'd do just to survive.

I can't place myself in the Iraqi's people position - and to be honest, I don't want to. It's a desperate situation, one where I am not sure I would be able to survive. These people deserve better. So if in order to give these people a better life, Corporate America wants something in return, then so be it. In the end, if Corporate America gets what it wants, we all benefit from it. The opressed people of Iraq get their freedom and a chance to live like human beings, and we get a stronger economy.

[Steve]

You raise an interesting point, Misu, one which many war protestors seem to be unable to grasp:

It's OK if, during the course of freeing a nation from a repressive dictator, a whole bunch of companies make a whole bunch of profit. The two things are not mutually exclusive.

It would be abhorrent if the latter cause were the primary one, but it's OK if it's a secondary one, as long as the main purpose is truly rooted in the ideals of freedom.

[jfcjrus]

Misu & Stevent,

Good points.
Perhaps, in the case of freeing a peoples, the ends do justify the means.
Something to concider, thanks.

Regards,