Perhaps I am naive about it, and I certainly agree that Iraq's oil is relevant, although more in the sense of ensuring availability than stealing it. But my point was that America's seemingly uncontrollable urge to export democracy is not always based on $$$, rather Bush and Blair had a messianic ideal that was often well intentioned.
Invading Iraq was on the agenda way before 9/11. The people that decided it are anything but naive.
>There are conspiracy theories that America invaded to steal Iraq's oil but they are not plausible.
Why not? The second largest oil producer in the world is invaded because of altruism out of their great heart. Geopolitics have nothing to do with that.
I believe is someone is naive here is you. At least you should respect as a valid and plausible theory(not calling it conspiracy in order to denigrate it) that the biggest army in the world are interested in controlling the energy producing countries just like any other empires before. And remember that was USA the ones that ousted the British Empire from Persia and the ones that toppled the democracy there.