English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2006-06-24 15:26:40 · 22 answers · asked by totish_z 1 in Politics & Government Politics

22 answers

Weapons of Mass Destructions in Iraq...he said that they should give it up or he will attack

2006-06-24 15:30:11 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Heard it was to finish what his Dad started with the Kuwait. invasion.
Georgie used 9/11 to the hilt! Those terrorists were all Saudi Arabians.. their funding came from there . Not Iraq. Bush is very close to the Saudi Royal Family..and big oil, of course.
Saddam was a monster..but the people did not request an invasion. Perhaps because about 30% of their population 'was' children. Lot of them gone now..not to mention US losses.

There were no WMDs.. just "faulty intelligence".

Bush wants to keep a US military presence in Iraq to maintain a military threat to other countries in the gulf. IT'S OIL AND No BID CONTRACTS (Halliburton) . period!

2006-06-24 15:43:48 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Lies or the truth?

My raised eyebrows made him shake his head, and he went on: "I don't know what's worse. Killing people over political philosophy, like in my time, or for oil. Hey, at least this time we might get something for our blood. Like ol' Tecumseh Sherman said, 'Nations go to war when there is something to be got by it'. Now oil can be got by it. After a great start, we're gonna be no different than any other empire that came down the historical pike.

"And I know what you're gonna say next. 'He sponsors terrorism'. Where's the proof? I thought we were going after bin Laden for that. But wait, Afghanistan ain't got any oil. So we need another monster, who's got something worth taking. And Saddam is so damn convenient. Yeah, he's an evil sonovabitch who deserves to be taken out, but are we the ones who should do it? Are our kids the ones who should die for it? Is he worth another Wall like this?

Col Hackworth, USA 10 Silver Stars, 8 Purple Hearts,

2006-06-24 15:31:58 · answer #3 · answered by cantcu 7 · 0 2

The reason that he gave publicly was because he believed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, which was against UN rules. However, in my opinion, he had alterior motives- perhaps oil, perhaps to avenge his father...who knows?!

2006-06-24 15:30:41 · answer #4 · answered by Princess 5 · 0 0

If you want to believe any of the lies that come out of his mouth go for it but remember he speaks with a forked tongue like any other serpents in his family do.
Now, what promises has he fulfilled since he took office that would be beneficial to "We the People?"
See, his forked tongue has spoken and those dumb bas**rds still reelection that serpent for another 4 miserable years.
He does what he wants to please his dad, no matter who gets killed in the process, another act of the serpent with a forked tongue.
The longer he stays in office the more chances we have of being killed by terrorists so why is congress sitting on their hands other then keeping their hands warm?
People, stand up and demand that he is taken out of office now before it's to late for all of us.

2006-06-24 15:42:50 · answer #5 · answered by fedupmoma 4 · 0 1

oil, to redraw the map of the middle east, and family reasons. (saddam tried to have his daddy assassinated when he went to kuwait during the first iraq war.)

2006-06-24 15:36:07 · answer #6 · answered by Spicoli 4 · 0 0

His Daddy , oil , oil & more oil !!! Plus he wanted to hide the fact that he is friends with Ladins family and needed to get them outta here so WMD was a diversion

2006-06-24 16:01:40 · answer #7 · answered by ₦âħí»€G 6 · 0 1

Oil was the main motivation. Killing Arabs is just a bit of sport along the way.

2006-06-25 00:27:03 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Bush's reason? nukcular without doing much destruction

2006-06-24 15:45:49 · answer #9 · answered by 2feEThigh 5 · 0 0

Vampirism.

2006-06-24 15:36:52 · answer #10 · answered by Muslim 4 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers