If the USA didn't act in Iraq..would the torture and rape rooms still be going on?

Question

If President Bush and congress didn't make the right choice to shut down the rape rooms and the human toture chambers in Iraq, to kill or capture Saddam who said he wanted to see a mushroom cloud over Washington DC...would these horrible things still be going on if we would have listened to the liberals?

Please just answer MY question: Would the rape & Torture still be going on?

Answer 1

Yes they would still be going on........To all the people who hate Bush,but Loved Clinton.....In no way was Bosnia or Somalia a threat to us......yet clinton sent troops to both places,and in Bosnia he sent in troops without UN Support.....I guess to Bush haters....The Lives of Bosnians and Somalians are worth more than Iraqi's.....................

Answer 2

Yes it would, that is why I am glad that Hussein is no longer the ruler of Iraq.

But I don't accept some of the premises of your question. Is that the reason why we invaded Iraq? I remember hearing several reasons: Saddam was in cahoots with bin Laden (highly unlikely given the fact that a secular Iraq was anathema to all that Osama believes in), he possessed WMDs (don't remember our finding those), and the human rights / rape room / torture concern (in that case, why Iraq? there are several dozen countries from which to choose).

Most "liberals" in Congress (including Senator Clinton, whom so many people love to hate) authorized the invasion of Iraq, although many have had second thoughts once they saw how poorly the invasion and its aftermath had been planned.

Answer 3

What about the horrors going on in North Korea, China, Afghanistan, Syria, Iran, and Saudi Arabia? Should we go into all of those places to stop dictators who murder, too? We cannot police the world. We should have gone after Bin Ladin when Al Quada was still small. We could have wiped the organization out. Instead we went into Iraq because Bush lied about WMD.

Answer 4

I think the question should be Who CARES?? In no way has Saddam's regime threatened the United States. That's a fact that the President still does not acknowledge. Why did we go to war with Iraq? Why?

Because a mad man tourtured his own citizens?? Big friggin deal. We tourture people all the time. Besides, that wasn't the justification the White House gave for the war. If you recall both the President and VP have said more than once (regarding Iraq having WMD available) that our smoking gun could be a "mushroom cloud" over a major US city.

- Saddam did not have nukes, or the means to get them.
- Saddam did not have WMD's. If he had them he would have used them on us, trust me. I spent 24 hours a day in a charcoal-lined Chem. suit with my field protective mask and atropine injectors strapped to my thigh for 30 days because our government told us Saddam had WMD's. He didn't!
- To argue that our war in Iraq is somehow a humanitarian mission to save Iraqi's from the torture chambers is laughable at best. We have probably killed more innocent Iraqi civilians than Saddam could have in his wettest dreams. Not only that but the US ignored International Law regarding torture and the ill treatment of POW.

So ask yourself. Was it worth the 2500 American KIA's to stop Iraqi's from killing other Iraqi's?

Was it worth the unknown thousands of Americans who died of their wounds (en route to medical facilities) to stop people in a tiny country from killing their fellow citizens?

Was it worth the 7,500 or so Americans who have been maimed in the effort to stop people in Iraq from killing other people in Iraq?

The war is bullcrap. What happened to Osama? Where is he? How come we aren't turning Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan upside down looking for the men responsible for 9/11? Why not? What does Iraq have to do with anything at all? You berate Liberals for debating the justification for the war, but you fail to see the bigger picture. What role of importance has Iraq served in the war on "terra"?

Answer 5

Yes the rapes would still be going on but not simply because of the "liberals"

Do people actually think things are so cut and dry that one and only one party is to blame (blame probably is not a good word either)?

But I seriously doubt Hussein would have ordered an attack on America. He was on his way out forcibly or because he was losing his power.

Answer 6

It probably would be still going on. But thats not the reason we invaded Iraq in the first place. Remember the WMD's? The magical, disappearing WMD's? Thats why we went in. Everything else came later.

Answer 7

MY QUESTION IS, WHY IS IT THE AMERICAN TAX PAYERS BUSINESS? THIS IS A BIG WORLD, DO YOU THINK IRAQ IS THE ONLY PLACE BAD THINGS ARE TAKING PLACE? BUSH HAD A VINDETTA AND ACTED ON IT, AT OUR EXPENSE AND AT HALLIBURTONS PROFIT.

Answer 8

Probably. Saddam Husein was a very evil man. he's just stupid now.

Answer 9

I would say: definitely

Answer 10

no i dont think so