I mean think about it. We freed the Iraqis. But now it's screwed up. And Saddam did not have WMD's. My point of view is that it would have been alright if we did not screw up. Only if it could be more like Afganastain. Also why did when invade the capital of Somalia?
2006-06-14 07:13:56 · 13 answers · asked by Bradford A 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Absolutely not. Going to war should be a last resort, not an offensive attack on a country who may possibly attack us someday. In my opinion, all the spin about Iraq having WMDs was a smoke screen and an excuse to invade them to retaliate for the bad blood between Sadam and Bush Sr. And if I read or hear one more person stating that we're at war over September 11, I'm going to vomit. Why is it so hard to comprehend that Bin Laden, the Taliban and al Quaida were responsible for the 9/11 attacks - not Sadam or the Iraqis? They are not one in the same. They are not even from the same countries. They have a religion in common. But many ignorant people who lump them together do so because they eat up what they are told by the government and the media. God bless the day people will make an effort to inform themselves and form their own thoughts...
2006-06-14 07:57:17 · answer #1 · answered by Jane D 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It's not as screwed up as the press makes it out to be. Further, at the time of the invasion, the entire world believed Saddam had and was pursuing more WMD. That belief, backed by much intelligence, made the war justified. That only a handful of small chemical warheads were found, along with tons of precusor chemicals and the chemical and biological infrastructrue to produce more weapons very quickly, is no reason to doubt the justification. And once the war was raged and the Iraqi security infrastructure and government destroyed, it made no sense to simply withdraw and leave the country to those who would do worse than Saddam ever did.
2006-06-14 14:20:40 · answer #2 · answered by Black Fedora 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Though many people think we shouldn't have gone to war they are partially correct some reason are that yes soldiers are over there just helping the Iraqis the people who ruined the twin towers on that horrific day and i do not think that is right because no one seemed to help Japan when they bombed Pearl Harbor and that how it should be! You shouldn't help that country when they destroyed yours! But i do think we did a good thing by going to war we have to fight for our country and what is right not let them keep repeating what they did again and again! If we always walked a way we wouldn't have this piece of land we are standing on or our beloved freedom now would we? What the Saddam did was heart breaking to the families that had family members in those building during 9/11 and that is exactly what we should do to the Iraqis make them suffer big time do to them what they did to us!!!! Going to war was a good decision on Bush's part but we should be making them suffer not help the Iraqis out!!
2006-06-14 14:35:19 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes we should have... if you think it's screwed up now, how bout when Saddam and his supporters could lock away anyone he pleased, kill anyone he pleased, rape anyone he pleased and the people had no say in their government. Now they can vote, and determine for themselves who best represents them(if that's your idea of screwed up, it's a shame).
Somalia was not invaded. We were asked by the United Nations to help them in policing that country because a civil war was going on there and millions of people were being killed by a military faction. In essence they were ethnically cleansing their country of the people they didnt like. The mistake was they sent the US military which is a war fighting organization, to do police work.
2006-06-14 14:32:04 · answer #4 · answered by SOG Wrath 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
First, let me say this. President Bush was acting on intelligence his people brought to him. You can only do so much with the information given. Did he deceive the nation? I don't know. But let me ask you a question. Have you forgotten about Syria? No one seems to have found out about the convoys sent from Iraq into Syria right before we invaded. Could this be our missing WMD's? Penny for your thoughts. Can you possibly say that the Iraqi's lives are any worse? Yes, the news media spreads all the negativity, and I may be 15, but my Father is over there, and he sends me pictures periodically. The nationals are getting food, water, the children are getting toys. My father told me that to the children, getting a stick of gum and a toy is the best thing in the world. It is a highlight to their day to see the children's faces light up with joy, and to hear the parent's thanking them for their help. It is the Socialist party in America, the liberals, that do not wish you to know this. How happy the people are their. To do this, they focus on our soldiers getting killed, the "inocents" our soldiers are killing. But let me ask you this. What if your vehicle just got blown up, and your best buddy, the one that graduated from basic with you, is dead in that vehicle, and you holed up in some little building, bullets flying over your head. And some of the people decide to venture out in the middle of the firefight. If they get hit, sorry, but this is war. get used to it. God Bless Our Troops And America. May she forever be free.
2006-06-14 15:28:20 · answer #5 · answered by Randall M 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The was unjustified. And this is according to the intel professionals I've worked with and talked to. I know quite a few that got out after the invasion because their conclusions were either ignored or twisted to make the facts what BushCo wanted.
Saddam did not have the capabilities to EVER reach the US like Bush said he did. HIs UAV program was as advanced as mine is. Go to a hobby supply story and Radio Shack. HE did not have a nuclear program anywhere but on paper. And his nuclear scientists lied to him in order to stay alive. With Iran and Al Qaeda working to overthrow his government he had to say that he had WMDs.
2006-06-14 14:28:42 · answer #6 · answered by darkemoregan 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No boss ! Because of the war many oil wells have been destroyed and the world petrol prices have shot up to such new heights.
Father bush and son bush have made this world more costly to live in and we will have to look for alternate fuels soon if againg any such thing happens.
let this world be a peaceful place for the entire human kind
2006-06-14 14:26:04 · answer #7 · answered by paffasd 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO we should have NOT gone to war...
and Saddam NEVER had WMD , that was just Bushes reason to go and take control of the oil
BUSH and his "possey" can lick my A**
2006-06-14 14:23:44 · answer #8 · answered by Alex-wine 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. The war in Iraq is completely wrong. Americans just kill innocent people without a reason. I think, this war is wrong and it should be over.
2006-06-14 14:19:59 · answer #9 · answered by Stephanos 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
War, yes. Staying in Iraq? I'm not so sure.
2006-06-21 11:23:48 · answer #10 · answered by dmbfan598 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋