Miguel Afonso Caetano"On balance, it seems clear that the invasion of Iraq really was not “all about oil” — or if it was, then the US war was staggeringly ill-conceived and ill-executed. There is basically no link you can make between Iraq’s vast oil reserves and direct benefits for the US state, consumers, or large oil companies.
So, if not oil, what was the reason? I am no expert on the Middle East, nor the American neoconservative movement circa 2003, but my conjecture is that it was part of the larger neocon campaign to project US global power throughout the Middle East and around the world. The 1979 Iranian Revolution, and Saddam Hussein’s audacious invasion of Kuwait in 1991, were evidence of a region out of the United States’ tight control. By taking out Saddam’s regime, the United States could implant another ally alongside Saudi Arabia and Israel (among others) to protect US interests in the region.
Of course, this theory has its own problems, given that the invasion has resulted in basically nonstop chaos and instability since. This chaos continues today as the United States tries to foster regime change in Iran (unlikely to happen simply with bombs from above).
But there is evidence that the neocons and the “Project for a New American Century” were thinking of the Iraq War this way."
