Why is it more important to bomb our enemies instead of stop giving them oil money?

Because we need the oil.





In some cases, the enemy would be able to sell oil to someone else. The big example is Saddam. Fine, he did not have WMD's but he wanted them. http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/鈥?/a> Yes, we helped Saddam when he first used them, and also turned a blind eye when he killed Iraqi civilians with them. But leaving him alone would have been a danger to the entire Middle East.





I am of the view that it was right to bring about regime change. I would rather we did that once both Afghanistan and Pakistan were democratic, as well as a just peace in Palestine, because then, bringing about a peaceful Iraq would have been easier. Too many people have died in Iraq. Both when Saddam was our ally, but also after the liberation with Iraqi civilians and our troops dying in a war that should have been fought differently.Why is it more important to bomb our enemies instead of stop giving them oil money?
Because if the populace were to be faced with a gas shortage (ca. 1970s x 2) they'd revolt.





There are other sources of oil, but they cost a great deal more to produce and deliver. Most people would rather not pay $5++ a gallon at the pump on a good day.Why is it more important to bomb our enemies instead of stop giving them oil money?
becomes bombs talk lowder then money bombs say hay ****** comply or die money says we wish ud reconsider
BEcause whether or not we give them oil money, they are still intent on destroying us. Do we not have the right to defend our culture and our very lives?
The idea was that the supply was threatened, so we had to exert more influence there.





The bigger picture is that alternative energy will certainly destroy the economies there in the long run. And I for one think the war money would have been better spent on research and development of alternative energy.