If the government...?

Question

had told you the "real reasons" for war (Sadaam is a tyranical dictator, Liberating the Iragi's, Oil, ETC.) instead of Sadaam is going to use WMD's in conjuctin with terrorist organizations to kill
Americans. Would you still have been for it. Don't you think that George Jr. was just cleaning up his Dad's mess?

Answer 1

I absolutely think that the entire WMD thing was, in the end, basically poor marketing for the war and yes I do very strongly believe that the real stuff over there was quite enough to justify it. I also think that people should remember there was an awful lot of reasons to believe there was WMD research going on chief of which was the Regime throwing out the UN inspectors. I would also add that, in a way, we DID find WMD's .. and a lot of them .... do you remember in the early days of the siege when we kept finding all of those secret houses packed with cash .... most of it in american bills? People seem to forget that ... now ask yourself ... what do you think that money was set aside for? What is it that you might be trying to get your hands on with houses full of cash?

Answer 2

Well first his dad didn't leave a mess. He set forth some very clear and explicit goals, achieved them with half the world and left. Check your history. Secondly if Bush had told you those things, would you have supported him. If he said to you right now in Dar fur genocide is occurring and I am sending troops to help would you support him? And as I recall he mentioned many of those other things along with WMD, and be serious in the months leading up to war, if you were Sadaam wouldn't you have moved everything out. Don't be so cynical, millions of people liberated and the birth of a democratic nation, I'd say that is a good thing.

Answer 3

Just a comment: I enjoyed reading the answers before mine. It shows people are paying attention, and not just being critical. Thank you all for that. By now I guess everyone knows Bill Clinton could have had Osama's head on a silver platter at least three times and passed it up all three times. We've gotten two of those bad guys since, and people still want to complain. I guess that's politics!

Answer 4

The fact here is that Al Qaeda has put a considerable effort into fighting coalition forces in Iraq. If not for that, those same resources would be free to be used elsewhere against civilians in a wide range of countries. If nothing else, we have given Al Qaeda a theater to which to expend themselves and a killing ground where we can elliminate them.

Answer 5

I am 100% for the war

Answer 6

I never believed Bush from the beginning and was always against the war.

Answer 7

Hindsight is 20/20

Remember, Neville Chamberlain conceded to all of Hitler's demands and flatly rejected pre-emptive military action against him... look where that got us..... I'm not a gambling man.

Answer 8

It would not have been the 1st time the U.S. had removed a dictator from power.

As a former soldier, I wouldn't have a problem with it.

Answer 9

i have been against it since the idea was going through the media

he's not cleaning up his dad's mess
he's just following his dad's wishes b/c his dad didn't take sadam down
that sounds better than stating that bush...... i'll leave it to ur imagination

Answer 10

I wasn't for it anyway, but if he had been honest and said one reason instead of the million conflicting reasons he gave, I might have been more supportive.