[jaguar]

*sighs*
I'd advise you to look into Iraq's oil production before saying that. At the very most Iraq has prodcued 3mill bpd, the issue being the geology it's oil exists in. Improved tech will increase that but only so far. Furthermore removing that oil from the Iraqi economy would utterly nuke it, not good if you're on a 'nationbuilding' mission is it? Taking Iraq for oil is not an ecnomically viable option, it will require hundreds of thousands of troops for years, that's going to cost far, far more than money the US could make out of Iraq in anything but the very long term and then the lifespan of oil comes into play.

How exactly is a 'democratic' state going to heace peace by force? Sounds like a dictatorship to me.... Iraq is a mass of tensions and age old feuds which will explode the second Saddam is gone, there is no central opposition and the guy who's name they've been throwing around is already under heavy attack. Anyone who thinks they can keep the peace for long without putting a gun to people's head has another thing coming. All that infrastructure you're talking about? Where is the money going to come from? Afghanistan still needs massive fund injections to survive too.

I've been trying to dig up a report in one of the financial mags recently talking about the longer term effect of mass outsourcing of jobs overseas and a trend of signifigantly cutting back R&D by US companies. Made for interesting reading i'll tell you that much, it was either BRW, Fin Review or Fin Times, can't remember which.