Originally Posted by Dick Dasterdly (Post 9347469)

Are you seriously suggesting that a country would deliberately go to war, simply to help its companies increase arms sales ?
Personally I find that arguement to ludicrous to even consider.

With regard to oil, I'm pleased you mentioned perks, because basically thats all its been and it would require an absolutely massive amount of perks to even begin to compensate for all the other costs and losses as well as loss of life involved, so I would be inclined to rule out that arguement also.

Kuwait got back control of its own oil after Saddam had stolen the lot.
The Iraqi oil income now goes to its ppl. instead of being syphoned of to buy arms and develop weapons, as well as kill off many of his own ppl by a very unpleasant dictator.

In those respects,a positive result,.... but whether the end justified the means is another question entirely.

Originally Posted by jdr (Post 9347508)

So they don`t sell them arms and send troops in to show them how to use them, get real. :rofl:

http://blogs.amnesty.org.uk/blogs_entry.asp?eid=1495

"According to the latest annual report on weapons-related exports, the government in 2006 approved arms exports to 19 of the 20 countries it identified as 'countries of concern' for abusing human rights.

They included Saudi Arabia, Israel, Colombia, China, and Russia. The report also reveals that during 2006 the UK authorised the export of more than 15,000 sniper rifles to countries including Pakistan, Jordan, Turkey and Saudi Arabia, components for military aircraft and tanks for China, and heavy machine guns for Colombia. "