No. GWB lied.
2006-08-07 19:01:40
·
answer #1
·
answered by seattlecutiepie 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The so called evidence of WMD and Nuke's was completely bogus. And this administration knew it.
There were other options beside invading this country. Following 911 the Bush administration had a golden opportunity to rally the UN to make it much more desirable for Sadam to allow inspectors back in. This, at the very least, should have been pursued but this President knows that the best way to be remembered is to be a War President.
Fighting world wide against Terrorist would not get that.
There was ample evidence presented to the administration that in fact what they were saying was not true. At the very least there was a big reason to doubt it. But there was nothing that was going to stop it.
So what has been accomplished by running headlong into this? We have fewer service men and women. IRAQ now has thousands of people dead and more dying every day. The IRAQ government has no real control over it's people and may never have. They are on the verge of civil war.
At present we are the worse thing that has happened to the people of IRAQ sense before Sadam. No one outside of the American protected green zone is safe. About 40 people a day are being kidnapped and either traded for ransom or killed. If it becomes known you have money you are in deep trouble.
Virtually no oil is being produced by IRAQ and will not for the foreseeable future.
No question Sadam was a very bad man. But he had control and the people at least knew where they stood. Not now. And not for a long time to come.
2006-08-08 02:42:49
·
answer #2
·
answered by John B 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
The logical answer for why no useful amounts of WMDs were found is because Saddam used as many as he dared on the Iraq and the Kurds and may have actually destroyed some that had become unstable - there is no proof one way or the other that WMDs were destroyed, but I said he did. Saddam is a thief, but not necessarily a liar. He was spending every thing he could on palaces and was stockpiling billions in US dollars.
2006-08-08 17:16:48
·
answer #3
·
answered by Paul K 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
IF there were WMDs what rational person would think that they would ever be found? The UN gave Sadam 9 years of "let's give Iraq another chance to comply with the UN resolutions" to either get the WMDs out or hide them in the deserts. Did Sadam have WMDs? Of coarse he did, he used them on the Kurds in the north. Give any dictator 9 years to do what they want and they could make more that WMDs vanish.
2006-08-08 02:16:24
·
answer #4
·
answered by Mav 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Oh yeah, a hole full of degraded chemical weapons where found that could not be used anymore, and the weapons, surprise surprise were old American weapons sold and buried during the Iran War with Iraq when RR was President.
These munitions were artillery shells, rusted and corroded beyond repair. Most of the Chemicals had leaked out and the the old artillery shell were useless as anything but a IUD maybe. It was doubtful that anyone would get hurt by these shells unless you dropped them on someone's head.
The right wing neocon's are grasping for answers, but there game is over.
2006-08-08 02:10:31
·
answer #5
·
answered by zclifton2 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes. They found residue of chemical weapons in shells that were not even in the UN inventory that Iraq gave them. It doesn't matter though because people are so small minded here and want so bad to believe Bush lied. Even if it came out to be true, liberals would say that he planted them. It's a no win situation, so why even argue it? News flash....the democrats all said that he had them and that he was a threat. Hillary, Kerry, and Gore all said this.
2006-08-08 02:04:48
·
answer #6
·
answered by haterade 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Bush said that Saddam was making weapons after the gulf war and said he would find those made after the gulf war... we did find some that were made before the gulf war... but everyone knew he had WMD before the gulf war...
so, we have found WMD, but not the ones Bush said were there... those made post-gulf war
and the only real "evidence" conservatives have is the "word" of two Iraqi generals... and of course, Iraqi generals are known for their kind hearts and honesty... hahaha
2006-08-08 02:31:00
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No... Two ex Iraqi generals said that they were smuggled out of the country on passenger aircraft that had been gutten.
These two are former Iraqi Airforce General George Sadas, and Ali Ibrahim. Both said they witnessed it.
We know Saddam had unaccounted for WMD's. We either had to take his word for it that they were destroyed and so called "confirm" it with inspections... or he burried them or gave them away.
Whatever the case, it wasnt to only reason for war.
BTW... AMEN TO BC.. the person below me!
2006-08-08 02:04:19
·
answer #8
·
answered by mavs4701 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you have a weapon that will knock down 2 buildings and kill 10 people with one shot, you have a weapon of mass destruction..
After that the number of people and buildings can be anywhere up to 50 million per shot,..who cares.
There has been nothing published that determines when a weapon gets that classification. Saddam had hundreds of such weapons.
2006-08-11 23:37:43
·
answer #9
·
answered by Mr. Been there 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Saddam had a habit of bragging about them, having people doing research to develop them. Why did most politicians here and in other nations feel that he had them? There was only one way to find out for sure and that is what we did. Can you imagine the uproar had we NOT gone in, later to find out the hard way that he did indeed have them. There was plenty of time for Saddam to ship the weapons to Syria and Iran before we went in.
2006-08-08 02:07:01
·
answer #10
·
answered by Dino4747 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes. They finally found the mirror at White house!
2006-08-08 02:02:51
·
answer #11
·
answered by SamWiseGamgee 3
·
0⤊
0⤋