Do you think that America will ever be invaded because another nation feels that our leadership is corrupt?

Question

well , america invaded iraq to throw saddam out because of the way he ws running the country, granted the gov, used weapons of mass destruction as an excuse, and i am not to good at history but haven't we thrown out other leaders for running the government poorly.

nichous rage says we went ot iraq to liberate them. you have been duped. that is an excuse. our gov, could care less if iraq was liberated. that is a coverup.

wow i feel alot smarter now. yes, almost everyone here has given me alot of good info,
now, i remember when the news first televised us dropping bombs in iraq, and many military were deployed and still are.
what i am asking is, would another country have enough balls to attack us like that.?

Answer 1

The chances are better that our country will be invaded if we have a weak President who doesn't have the guts to stand up to terrorists!
For all his problems, Bush was a better choice than either Gore or Kerry!!!

Answer 2

Absolutely not.

No other nation has an army large enough to invade save China and they do not have the ability to moblize their army fast enough to invade.

We don't "throw out leader because they ran their governments poorly" We removed those who have proven themselves to be extremely unbalancing to peace in the world.

Hitler.
Hirohito
Slobodan Milošević
Hussein

These people have all proved to be tremendously dangerous in how they applied their power and if you believe that there is any correlation between these people I listed and Bush then I pity you.

There is a vast and significant difference between pushing for genocide and torturing whole ethnic groups of people and helping spread the freedom of choice.

As for the weapons of mass destruction thing, there have been claims that Saddam had them as far back as 1998. Clinton, Albright, Kerry, they all said the exact same thing.

I hate to do this but I just have too. Please do not listen to tiravellian as this person is clearly insane and I shall prove this.

"First - Let me correct you. America invaded Iraq because of oil interests in the Middle East, not to remove Saddam Hussein from power. Iraq is a much worse place now than it was before, and I think if America does not stop meddling in the affairs of other countries that someone may enact regime change on us as we have done on so many other countries."

The second link is the text of Bush's speech announcing the onset of war with Iraq. Please note that throughout the speech Bush speaks to the liberation of an oppressed people. Only once does he mention WMD's and it was that bit the the eternally left media fixated on and ran with.

Second, if tiravellian honestly believes that Iraq was better off with Saddam than they are now we must do every single thing we can to ensure that tiravellian never reproduces. Iraq is fundamentally better off now than it ever was with Saddam in the simple fact that they are now free. They have their own democratically elected government. 65% of the registered Iraqi population voted in the elections. That's more than those who voted in the 04 US Presidential elections.

Oh, they also don't have to worry about government authorized chemical weapon attacks such as those in Halabjah.

Tiravellian is a moron of the highest order and expressly deserves as much ridicule as can be thrown at him.

Lastly, the only reason the world would be at all upset with what happened in Iraq is that we went this time without the all-mighty UN's approval. Everywhere else we have gone we went at their behest but after waiting around through 17 RESOLUTIONS for them to REAMIN SEIZED of the Iraqi matter and them not really doing anything we went it alone and sometimes that's just how it's gotta be done.

What' like France is really going to try and rise up against us? OR Canada?

What ajoke.

Answer 3

America was invaded many time in history. America was attacked and invaded on 9/11. America was invaded during the war of 1812, the White House was set on fire. Terrorists continue to try to invade America.

The primary reason for going into Iraq was because through cooperating with terror and pursuing WMD, Iraq was a threat to the USA. Note there are many other totalitarian countries, such as Saudi Arabia, that don't directly threaten America and we don't invade.

Answer 4

First - Let me correct you. America invaded Iraq because of oil interests in the Middle East, not to remove Saddam Hussein from power. Iraq is a much worse place now than it was before, and I think if America does not stop meddling in the affairs of other countries that someone may enact regime change on us as we have done on so many other countries.

We cannot even take care of our own people in our own country, yet we go out to mess with someone elses country. All the homeless we have here starving on our streets, yet we are giving billions of dollars to countries like Israel and we get absolutely nothing in return.

The US is already stretched to the breaking point, military wise. We are in South Korea, Japan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Germany, and a ton of other places.

Lastly, there are those, like myself who believe 911 was created by this administration in collusion with other groups to affect the American people in such away that when they started reforming laws in the name of "National Security" the American people would not care.

It used to be illegal to hold someone without due process, but now, with the new laws, the government can come into your home, take you, your wife, or your children and hold you without explaining to you why you are being held for an indefinite amount of time. They do not have to allow you to see a lawyer. There is already pending lawsuits because the NSA has been monitoring American's phone calls (they are only supposed to be monitoring calls going internationally) and have also admitted to monitoring the e-mails of college students at universities during anti-war rallies against the war in Iraq.

I suggest you wake up and realize what the neo-conservatives have done by consolidating power. Some will say, "If you are doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about" however, it will get to the point where if they catch you saying, "I don't like what the government is doing" it will be illegal. Bush already said back in his first time if you spoke out against the war in Iraq that you were not a patriot of the country. I was not aware that he could decide that people who disagreed with his policies were wrong for doing so.

And I hate to burst your bubble, but we are not actually a "democracy".

Answer 5

No, that's foolish. Don't you think that Hitler and Japan and Italy back in WWII thought America's leadership was corrupt? Don't you think the USSR thought the same thing? There are plenty of countries who disagree with our leadership, but they know better than to invade.

The U.S. went to Iraq to get the Weapons of Mass Destruction some of which were recently discovered and the rest moved to Syria when we basically told Iraq that we were coming. It didn't start out as getting rid of Saddam, though that was a plus. Do you think we should have let Hitler stay in power?

Answer 6

america is presently the world super power and with that comes a power that can b used in anyway....if u'll go out of u.s to other countries ( under developed ones)u'll come across this saying: "usa has the best ppl in the world but the worst govt.".
as far as an invasion is concerned ,america is very powerful so i doubt that anyone could invade it but the nations in which the usa has meddled in r trying to bring attention to themselves by using methods that target the usa population.its like the film "peacemaker".u'll know wht im saying if u have seen it.the future is kind of heading that way,as there r always two sides to a story.
as far as iraq is concerned ,those ppl had never asked for usa help so they dont think that usa actually helped them.its a country thats is divided in two large sunni and shia sects .they were fighting among themselves.when usa invaded iraq,the govt of usa knew that they wont b able to form a stable govt there.population vise the shia r in majority.but forming a shia country will strengthen the neighbouring iran which usa will definately try to avoid.making a sunni govt isnt possible either cause of their minority.so lets c wht they can do abt that but if u read the news,throwing saddan over has not impoved the situation yet..infact its actually worse.the reason why usa over threw saddam was not to help the iraqi ppl, it was to get access to the arab land's oil and saddam presented the usa govt a golden opportunity.
lets c wht happens next.

Answer 7

It could happen, but probably not anytime soon. Most other governments understand that we are a democracy, and they just have to wait until the next election. Saddam was different because he would have been there until he died.

Also, no one would try to invade the U.S. with a large military force. The only way to survive a fight with the U.S. military for any length of time is to use guerilla warfare, like the insurgency in Iraq. The U.S. has SCARY high-tech weapons for blowing up large military units. Consider how fast the Iraqi army got wiped out in both wars. It was only able to function with large combat forces for a few days.

I think we'll just continue to see people trying to fight us through terrorism.

Answer 8

What makes you think Pres. Bush invaded Iraq for non-existent WMDs? Did you not see the thousands of Kurds dead, gassed on the mountainside? The many mass-graves? Did Saddam ever provide proof that he destroyed the rest of the chemicals as he was supposed to do? What do you think he was doing during the 4 years he disallowed inspections? I hope I live long enough to see someone find a tunnel filled with the cache of WMDs.

Answer 9

The majority of the decent people in Iraq were happy we got Saddam, he was mean and barbaric to his people, torturing, cutting out their tongues, raping women, ETC.

You are right about not being up on your History, we went to Iraq originally to capture the one responsible for 9/11.... Everything else just fell into place. If we werent there, then those freaks would be over here, not that there arent some already over here plotting against us, but, it would be way out of control if we werent there.

Read up on your History, and then ask another question!

Answer 10

We are too strong to be invaded in the traditional sense. It would be suicidal. Terrorist already invaded. They attacked the World Trade Center twice. There was the unofficial war in Nicaragua. In Panama we went down there and brought there president to a prison. The United States has a history of sticking there nose into other peoples business.

Answer 11

Attacked, yes. Invaded, no. There is corruption in all governments, because we're human beings. But any invasion would be fought with the utmost ferocity.

And no, we don't stage Coup d'état's in the USA (although some may argue that assassinations do the same), we typically vote them out, or if it's serious enough, we attempt to impeach.