How can someone justify the invasion of a sovereign nation that had no wmds and no connection to terrorism?

Question

The 9/11 commission verified that Iraq had no proven connection to terrorism....And there are thousands of dictators out there ..Why arent we in North Korea???

What .....what the hell is a zar...ohhh...i think you mean Zarqawi...he didnt even show up until well after our invasion..our occupation of their country is breeding recruitment and giving them new reasons to hate us..

Answer 1

They can't. ILLEGAL ATTACK. ILLEGAL OCCUPATION.

Answer 2

WMD was found
The Taliban had diplomatic relations with Iraq established in 1999
That means that Al Queda had access which means that Zarqarwi had safe haven in 2002. CNN and Fox confirmed this
and shows that stupid is as stupid does. You wanted diplomacy in Iraq and now you want to be a cowboy in North Korea

Answer 3

If we were in North Korea you probably would still be complaining!!!
Iraq did have connections to terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. We have satellite video of them moving the weapons out of the country!
Plus, Saddam Hussein was a tyrant with Hitler like ideas. In the third verse of our national anthem it says," And counquer we must when our cause it is just."
Our cause was just so if you want to go to North Korea, Enlist you might get your wish.

Answer 4

I would like to remind you and anyone else out there of one thing: We were attacked first on 9/11, and therefore, payback is hell. Iraq has always had links to terrorism, and it is only logical to assume that there was a link between 9/11 and Al-Qaeda.

Research your facts for your questions so you can make some type of sensible argument on here first.

Answer 5

Iraq was easy. We're not in North Korea because China is behind them.

Answer 6

FOR GOD'S SAKE PEOPLE! DO SOME RESEARCH. FOR ALL OF YOU IDIOTS WHO THINK WE WENT TO WAR IN IRAQ TO FIGHT TERROR OR FOR OIL OR WHATEVER. DO NOT ASK BIASED QUESTION UNTIL YOU LEARN YOUR GD HISTORY.

MORON READ A FRICKING NON BIASED BOOK!!!!
READ THIS AND DO NOT EVER, I MEAN EVER ASK ANOTHER DUMB QUESTION AGAIN!

After the first gulf war, the CIA started funding several groups within Iraq to oust Hussein. One of those groups was headed by Ahmed Chalabi. Clinton continued his funding through his term. Chalabi wanted more, he needed US troops to over through the regime. He testified in front of the UN and in front of congress that Saddam had WMD's. BOTH dumba** parties believed him. When Saddam, in his arrogance, continued to play games with UN inspectors we went to war.

Both parties went to WAR frickin WAR on the testimony of ONE man.. The SAME man that the British Rockingham project still had doubts about.

The way you completely forget about history and dissolve your own party of responsibility simply because they changed their minds NOW...is sickening

Answer 7

1. There is no oil there.

2. NK actually MIGHT have WMD.

3. NK has a large, well-equipped, well-trained armed force which would kill thousands of US, UN and SK troops, which would be hell on public opinion polls.

Answer 8

So let me get this straight- Saddam wasn't giving suicide bombers $25,000 and he didn't give safe haven to Palestinian and other terrorists BEFORE 9\11 and he didn't have terrorist training camps in northern Iraq? And that myth about him invading Kuwait...total BS, right?
o.k.

Answer 9

why was Zar called there leader in Iraq then

Answer 10

Because some people are refusing to listen to the truth.

Answer 11

Shouldn't you ask yourself why aren't you in Saudi Arabia?