Actually this is inaccurate as well, "President decided to go to war on Sept 12. He is the decider, he is the one who must be held accountable".
No, the president is not the "decider" and ultimately held accountable. The president cannot go to war simply because he says so. He must first get congress to approve the act of war.
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/10/11/iraq.us/
the Senate voted 77-23 to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq if Saddam Hussein refuses to give up weapons of mass destruction as required by U.N. resolutions. the House approved an identical resolution, 296-133.
Congress views the same intelligence reports the president does and with that information is how they decide to go to war or not.
2006-06-24 03:45:35
·
answer #1
·
answered by Shep 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
we didn't go there to find wmd. we went to create a client state that would cater to US and Israeli interests.
even if there WERE wmd's, Iraq was no threat to his neighbors, let alone the US.
N.Korea has nuclear weapons, as does Pakistan, and each country has SOLD them to each other, and other countries.
Clearly, wmd's was just the carrot held out infront of the lesser educated individuals to create a consent of public opinion in the US to invade in the wake of 9/11.
and its not really shocking, all the creators of policy have had these views for the last 25 years in the Reganite Regime. Any halfway educated person knew that GWB would be invading Iraq, and other countries in the MidEast before he won the Republican Primary.
No surprises, just abhorration of diplomacy, education and democracy.
It makes sickening sense.
2006-06-24 03:24:24
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
this is inaccurate.
this is inaccurate. and by inaccurate i mean not factually correct or informed
Iraq was was based on lies....
We knew the information coming in to the CIA was very very questionable.
The vice president wanted control of information given to the DEPT of DEFENCE of DOD
The CIA was pressured by Cheney who litterally bullied CIA intellegence.
DOD came up with its own info, which the CIA disputed.
Powells speech was based on a source called CURVEBALL who was know to lie, and was debunked by the Germans.
President read things in his speach which the CIA did not confirm.
** The administration presented to the congress information that had been contested and disputed by the CIA, as irrefutable fact rather than what it really was...*** [rev thanks.]
President decided to go to war on Sept 12.
He is the decider, he is the one who must be held accountable. **for lying to the people of the US, to its Congress, and distorting evidence to get them to vote for the war** [rev. thanks ] {note most likely the Republican party would have supported the presidnet regardless of fact, but for arugments sake lets believe they didn't rubber stamp}
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/...
The more you know the more you will see that it all plan to expand the powers of the president because like the war on drugs the war on terror is an abstract with no nation state to declare victory over or to make surrender.
2006-06-24 03:19:29
·
answer #3
·
answered by nefariousx 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Inspectors were sent in to search for WMD but Bush refused to allow them enough time to do the search. He pulled them out and attacked. So now we're in this war without end.
2006-06-24 03:27:18
·
answer #4
·
answered by notyou311 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Saddam even offered to let US troops and the FBI to come in and make sure about the weapons. The Bush A$$ministration decided to invade instead...
2006-06-24 03:24:57
·
answer #5
·
answered by Isaac 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Don't waste your time. This site is filled with Saddam-apologist. No matter what you say, they will still ignore it. They lost two elections and are on their way to losing a third. Let them have their minor little victories here.
2006-06-24 03:37:56
·
answer #6
·
answered by Richard M 3
·
0⤊
0⤋