Why are people not more outraged that we were sold a war on lies?

Question

Specifically the lies the Bush administration told us about how we were going to Irag to find WMD's.

Answer 1

I can't believe some of the responses you're getting, dude!

There are some replies above this one that think attacking Iraq was necessary. First - I am all in favor of the post-9/11 response to Afghanistan, specifically, the Taliban that helped Osama. Unfortunately, Osama was originally trained by the CIA to cause terror vs. the USSR back in the day, but we'll forget that for now.

Doesn't anyone recall when Bush paraded his whole team out and they were certain they knew where the WMDs were, etc. etc.? Did Saddam need to be stopped? Well, yeh, but he (and the whole country) was contained and crippled. There were humanitarian organizations calling for blockades to be lifted, it was crushing the country.

I honestly don't know why people aren't more outraged about it. I think racism and crusade nostalgia play into it. I think they just don't care. It sets an example in a somewhat positive way, that is, it shows other nations that the USA is irrational, therefore, stay away. Unfortunately, I think acting firmly rational and strong can have the same effect.

Oh, yeah. I guess people are ok with attacking Iraq because it helped bring down oil prices.

Whoops.

Answer 2

The WMDs were there within weeks of the invasion. General Sada (#2 man in Iraqi Air Force) wrote a book and has reported on how Saddam used an emergency on a Syrian dam to transport by plane and trucks the stockpile he had when it was imminent the invasion was going to occur. Further, Saddam allowed Al-Zarkawi to operate an Al-Quada camp in northern Iraq, for almost 2 years prior to the invasion. Saddam only imbittered the U.S. more by putting off the U.N. inspectors under many resolutions being disregarded. There had been a continuous Al-Quada link and funding from Saddam, and the U.N. Oil for Food program was not benefitting the Iraqi people, but mostly Saddam's own pocket and corrupt government

Answer 3

Because the American people seem to have lost their back bone... I mean honestly we were quick to impeachment President Clinton for doing nothing other than being a man.

However, we turn the other cheek when President Bush and his administration openly and publicly lied to the American people about the Iraq country having weapons of mass dectruction.

It make no sense to me as to why we continue to let him get away with this. As voters and persons whos votes make up Congress, Sentate and Political Administration, they should investigate and impeach his azz for violation of at least 1000 different laws... ranging from lack of common sense to falsing justifying reason for war.

There were NO weapons... however there "was evidence". We'll if you have evidence, then you have places and resouces that can verify these allegations and claims. AND.. you would FIND the weapons!


This war simple stems form his father not being able to start the war before him time was up in the office.. you see, this was him main agenda. Like father like son. ... the old saying goes, the apple does not fall to far from the tree.

Answer 4

The outrage should be that we initiated an attack against another country. Whether or not that country had weapons or not should not be the question.

The only questions we should have when preparing for war is, were we attacked? Was it this country that attacked us? Or, has that country threatened or given any indication that they are going to attack us?

If the answers are 'yes', then we can bring the 'war' card to the table. Otherwise it should not even be under consideration.

Even if they were not lies, why was any American sold on it?

Answer 5

I wasn't lied too. Bush clearly stated that Iraq, Iran & NK were the axis of evil that harbour terrorist. In the state of the union address he said that these countries would be dealt with. Iraq has democracy growing and a rebellion dying, NK is in check with multi lateral discussions & Iran has a choice to make. It sounds to me like you have selective memory.

Not to mention, other nations and congress all thought there were WMD's there. There have been WMD'S there - Saddam used them on the Kurds and Clinton stated they were there. Saddam could have worked with the UN but choose not to. If you act like your hiding something - then 9 times of 10 you are hiding something. BTW - the CIA has small amounts of WMD'S in Iraq.

Answer 6

because we where needing to take out what happened on 9/11 on some body and we couldn't find the real person responsible so we finished what Bush Sr. couldn't do instead. We all wanted action taken, but then realized it was the wrong war after now it's to late. We have to finish what we started now. And guess what? We still don't have the person responsible for 9/11.

Answer 7

Because of 2 reasons. 1 - They felt that it was the right decision based on the intelligence communities reports at the time. 2 - They feel that even without the WMD's, we needed to get rid of a homicial maniac that was committing ethnic genocide of the Kurdish people (the same reason we sent troops into Kosovo).

Answer 8

Simple that was not the main reason we went to war.
17 UN resolutions brought an end to the Cease Fire agreement.
You did not mention long range missles either. Those were forbidden.
Al Quieda was also in Iraq in 2002 according to both Fox and CNN.
The Dems are losing you are losing and it is a better day now that the Al Quieda Order of Battle is in our hands.They admit they are losing. Libs in contrast remain in Denial. Kisses

Answer 9

You have got to be kidding us, right? You don't read all the crap in the newspapers about how horrible everything America does is?

Or perhaps, just perhaps, you've deluded yourself into believing, as do so many other liberal intelligentsia, that you are the true holders of all truth and knowledge, and anyone who does not think the same as you must, therefore, be ignorant/stupid/gullible.

So much for a belief in "diversity of opinion". Pfaugh!

Answer 10

Because the USA, The Middle East, and the World is a safer place without Saddam Huessin being in power.