by DriveElectric » Thu 07 Jul 2005, 17:40:13
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('GD', '
')Remember the 2002/03 mantra?
Terrorism, WMD... Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein... Terrorism, WMD... Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein... Terrorism, WMD... Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein...
Skip forward to the last 6 months:
Iran, Terrorism, Nucular (sic) weapons, Iran, Nucular programme, Iran WMD, Terrorism... Iran, Terrorism, Nucular weapons, Iran, Nucular programme, Iran, WMD, Terrorism...
Iraq sort of makes sense to invade. We could never allow Hussein free of sanctions, but at the same time we needed to be able to get investment into Iraq's oil fields and eventually expand output to 4 or 5 million bpd.
But the scenario just doesn't make sense to invade Iran or any other oil countries in the ME. None of them are withholding oil from the markets. They are all investing massively to expand output.
The only country where I see the USA potentially invading for regime change is Venezuela. Hugo Chavez could use a visit from a CIA sniper. Then allow the real oil people to get back to work in the state run oil company. Right now Chavez has fired them all and has political hacks screwing up everything.
But Iran? No real reason for an invasion scenario makes sense. Perhaps at most a bombing of their nuke facilities.
Syria? No oil there worth invading over. Maybe a few bombs as a warning shot to behave.