erm, the US wanted the oil fields under western control. they cannot stop a russian company from out bidding a US or UK company if they have the finances to do so. the US couldnt go in to 'hijack' the oil. they went in to open up the industry to stop iraq from hoarding it and controlling the supply themselves, as they were choosing who got the quotas... whether its a russian company or a british, finnish or US company who has bought the rights, they will still sell to the main players whether they are US based or not.. which if left in Iraqi hands they might not have done. Hence why it was important to go there to stop this practice. IF as you say they went in for other reasons, why havent they used that as a precendent to simply invade any country they dont like the leader of? ill tell you, its because its not worth it to go to the other countries due to lack of resources. It is worthwhile in US interests to wage a small war and then monetize the nations assets to help expand the distribution of oil... would this have happened under Saddam? of course not. The US didnt go to stick their flags on the oil - but to open it up so that they could at least appear on a superficial level to be going in there for other reasons. i think you are looking very naively at the situation and given how we are currently sitting through tribunals about the validation for Iraq invasion - this to me flags up warnings. did we go in under the pretext of terrorism, security etc but the catalyst was the refusal of saddam to open up his oil reserves to the west? sure its speculation, but we dont have any proof that we went in for any reason to the contrary, just the usual lies and spin from the government. So you cannot disprove that the reason we went in was the Oil, but then i cant prove that the reason we did go in was the oil. But that is beside the point, and NOT the point for discussion, if you could possibly comprehend the initial post. The point was, we went in, are now - as a western block profiting from the opening up of Iraqi oil redistribution - yet why are we not compensating those injured and effected in the invasion?