More army chaplaincy

[Terrance]

s~Z wrote:
> 
> >>>Someone ignorant of the oil market wrote:
> 
> >What if the new "democratic" regime of Iraq were to decide that
> >increasing oil production is not in its own self-interest?<<<
> 
> But, the intent of the question remains. What if a democratic Iraq decides
> to manage the country in ways that are counter to US interests?

That's to be expected. England does, Japan does, Australia does, Brazil
does. 
What if the people elect a government more hostile to USA interests than
the one the USA has just removed? Very possible. So, the argument that
assumes that the USA invaded Iraq to control Iraq'a oil interest or
control it's destiny is nonsense because it's not an achivable objective
not is it a desirable one.