How do you explain so many different explanations for being in Iraq?

Question

All you people that support Bush out their, How do you explain all the different explanations for being in Iraq? First it was he has got weapons of mass destruction. They were never found*, then it was he was trying to get WMD’s , but he really wasn’t. Then it was because he was abusing the oil for food program (give me a break just stop the oil for food program so much cheaper), then it was because he was breaking UN resolution. Come on people, their have been so many excuses, and Im sure that I have forgotten a few here. What ever the latest excuse is why didn’t they just use that one to begin with? Lets face it the American people were bald faced lied to. And yes Saddam was an A. hole, but he wasn’t worth loosing American lives over.


*The so called WMD’s that were recently found in Iraq don’t count, for one their over 20 years old, and second we already knew about them, we just finally stumbled upon them.

O ya lets not forget that Saddam had a part in 9/11,,,That one was funny

Answer 1

Pure ignorance and apathy.

I do not even get how people have for gotten the roles of Ahmed Chalibi, the CIA, the Rockingham Project, Bill Clinton, the UN and most importantly Saddam Hussein's miscalculations and defiance.

Answer 2

The Oil-for-Food scam and the myth that we ever connected Saddam to 9/11 were never the basis for the liberation of Iraq. I don't know where you pulled these 'facts' from.

All the rest of these reasons - the failure to comply with resolutions, the failure to have documented what happened to his stockpiled WMD*, his attempts to acquire uranium (Joe Wilson lied), his acquisition of WMD delivery systems, etc - were all given at the same time - it was a litany of transgressions - when the Bush administration was seeking approval from Congress, and when it created the coalition.

These reasons have never changed, nor have they been proven false, despite the distortion, fabrication and outright lies spewed by Bush's opponents. These were the same reasons, based on the same intelligence info, that Clinton bombed Iraq for, and that Congress approved Bush's use of the military for.

To go back now and distort the facts is wrong. So stop it.

*Per the UNSCOM documents (available on the UN website), Saddam had admitted to quite an inventory of WMD, which he was supposed to, but never did, provide documentation or proof of having destroyed it all. Because he had not dismantled all his WMD labs, and because he spent a lot of time and effort deceiving and obstructing the UN inspectors, all the intelligence agencies in the world believed he still had those WMDs, and possibly had created more.

Answer 3

All those reasons, whether you buy the hype about lies or not. Also, because of the terrorist boom, the Middle East badly needed quelling, and Saddam Hussein--who had committed so many atrocities against his own Islamic brethren, in-country and out--was the perfect target for setting an example.
Moreover, in regard to those 'mythical' WMD's, Saddam himself admitted that he had them, and shipped them to Syria during his grace period.
Course, there's no point telling your kind of person anything. If you used your eyes and ears, in matters both here and abroad, you'd wouldn't buy any of those liberalistic shouts, either.

Answer 4

In a experience, the warfare began in 1990 with the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. In reaction, the U. S. and different countries waged warfare in 1991 to throw the Iraqis out of Kuwait; Iraq became soundly defeated. G H W Bush and the different allies perceived a probability of widening the conflict if Iraq were to be completely defeated, and concluded a truce settlement with Iraq to end the combating. between the provisions of the settlement became that Iraq would dismantle, in an in charge way, its distinct guns of mass destruction, a number of which it had used hostile to both Iran and hostile to the Kurds contained in the north of Iraq. It did not do this; inspectors despatched to implement the settlement were impeded at each turn. more desirable than a dozen UN resolutions observed over the years, annoying Iraqi compliance, all of that were skipped over. The statemate endured until eventually the 9/11 attacks, which confident G W Bush that having WMD in volatile palms became a probability that could want to no longer be tolerated. a very last call for became made that the settlement be kept; this became rebuffed, yet Saddam began to get worried about the problem and secretly shipped very nearly each and each of the WMD resources to Syria, starting off in June 2002. the outcome became that the U. S. and some different countries invaded Iraq in 2003 to depose Saddam and take care of the WMD situation once and for all. The Iraqi military collapsed in short order; Saddam went into hiding, and the U. S. and its allies took over the country. Insurgents, supported by Iran, Syria, and non-nationwide communities elsewhere, have persevered to strive against the occupation and also attacked civilian objectives to get the non secular factions to strive against one yet another. Saddam and his accurate lieutenants were captured, tried for crimes hostile to Iraqi civilians, got here across to blame, and executed. besides the undeniable fact that the conflict keeps. in the period in-between, al Qaeda, Taliban, and different enthusiast Muslim communities, who've made no secret of their perception in and reliance on the U. S.'s lack of decision to prosecute a lengthy and puzzling warfare, are biding their time, searching in the route of a US pullout merely so they can take over and resume one among those activities that they engaged in in Afghanistan. might want to this ensue, and they get better the WMD resources from Syria, it would pose a mandatory probability to usa of america.

Answer 5

"FRAUD:
The Strategy Behind the Bush Lies and Why the Media Didn't Tell You"
by Paul Waldman

This book does an excellent job of explaining why George W. Bush will go down in history as the President who could never tell the truth (George Washington, for those who forget, could never tell a lie).

Answer 6

Loveben, I agree. And I'm sure the bush administration is scratching their collective heads wondering what other false explanations they can feed to us. Can you believe Republicans are actually using bush's war for their platform in the mid-term elections? Ballzy move, but we will not be fooled again.

Answer 7

I know you aren't going to like this, but I still suggest you use the Spellcheck. I stopped at your use of "their" instead of "there..."

Answer 8

Because they forgot which lie they told first.

Answer 9

IT"S AN ILLEGAL WAR