Washington had already been preparing for a new invasion of Iraq before 9/11. The Los Angeles Times reported (U.S. Air Bases Forge Double-Edged Sword - Page 2 - Los Angeles Times) that one year prior to the attacks of 9/11, the U.S. began constructing Al Adid, a billion dollar military base in Qatar with a 15,000-foot runway, in April 2000. What was Washington’s stated justification for the new Al Adid base, and other similar ones in the Gulf region? Preparedness for renewed action against Iraq.
Here’s a Pentagon document dated March 5, 2001, entitled Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oil Field Contracts. It details how Iraq’s oil fields would be carved up and outsourced to Western oil companies two full years before the war. It would later be revealed that an invasion of Iraq was at the top of the Bush administration’s agenda only 10 days after his inauguration, which was a full eight months before 9/11.
Toppling Hussein a priority of Bush since early in term - Baltimore Sun
Bush Sought 'Way' To Invade Iraq? - CBS News
No. The U.S.-led invasion was inspired predominantly by Iraq’s public defiance of the petrodollar system.
On September 24, 2000, Saddam Hussein allegedly emerged from a meeting of his government and proclaimed that Iraq would soon transition its oil export transactions to the euro currency.
Not long after this meeting, Saddam Hussein began preparing to make the switch from pricing his country’s oil exports in greenbacks to euros. As renegade and newsworthy this action was on the part of Iraq, it was sparsely reported in the corporate-controlled media.
CNN ran a very short article on its website on October 30, 2000, but after this one-day news cycle, the issue of Iraq’s switch to a petroeuro essentially disappeared from all five of the corporate-owned media outlets. CNN.com - Breaking News, U.S., World, Weather, Entertainment & Video News
By 2002, Saddam had fully converted to a petroeuro – in essence, dumping the dollar.
On March 19, 2003, George W. Bush announced the commencement of a full scale invasion of Iraq.
That's your reason.
This is what happens when you confuse cause, for effect. And you ignore history. You wanna know the reason why we were planning before 9/11 for a war in Iraq? Because we had already been forced into airstrikes against Iraq, and it also might have been because Iraq wasn't being that cooperative. (Oh, and I'm sure the grudge between GW and Saddam had nothing to do with the attempt on his Father's life. I think something like that would probably be taken personal.) Finally, you realize that the military is planning military engagements right now for China? For Pakistan? Is this also because their running away from the Pedropound of whatever? Of course not, that's because the military is always game planning for the current Strategic threats out there. Heck, we had one for Afghanistan, and that's why only hours after the attack we already had special forces inside Afghanistan readying military operations.
Also, you realize the US doesn't even get the majority of Iraq's Exports right? Hell, we're not even getting the largest cut of Iraq's oil. But I suppose that's something you conveniently missed hmm?
The average 20-something rural Syrian/Iraqi owns an AK-47, they're everywhere in those lands.
They gained money and funds from ransoming the people and selling the oil that they captured, and used that to train themselves and get themselves equipment.
Still, after all that, they're still less equipped and less skilled than your average Kurd militant.
There was no American training and funding of their troops.
"The darkest places in hell are reserved for those who maintain their neutrality in times of moral crisis."
Lets see if you can manage to hang with that rather that getting lost in History.