>>
>>How you can possibly agree with that ??
>
>What I am agreeing with is that oil is a necessary part of the world's economies. And that a desire to have stability in a region which supplies a large part of that oil is understandable. Furthermore, I think one of the bigger reasons for the war was motivated by economics.
>

>Whether war was the best way to achieve that desire is a different matter. I think the decision whether to go to war is incredibly complex, is undertaken on the advise of presumably well-educated and well-intentioned people, and will certainly entail many factors that you and I will never ever know about.

I highly doubt that there is/was ANYTHING altruistic or well intentioned
in heads of those people who started all this (Donald R. , Dick C. & Co)
They are directly serving interests of defence/oil cartels in US
and NOT those of ordinary hard-working Americans.

>
>War is often motivated by economics Srdjan. I can't help that.

That is an old economic principle more common for days of early
capitalisam then today's modern world.
[C. Marx; War is continuation of economic policies by ... ]

Europe needs oil as well but you don't see EuropeanUnion attacking anybody in middle east. (UK acted alone, outside EU)

>On the otherhand, if the oil from that region was to stop then the world economies would, at the least, have a very bad time during which millions of people, like you and your family (and mine), will have an incredibly hard >life.

Why wld it stop for god sake ?? Saddam was forbidden to freely export oil except via that Oil4Food program ...
If there was not for 9/11 and Iraq invasion, crude oil wld probably be
still hovering between 30$ - 40$.