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

32 answers

Yes! The problem is that everyone forgets the reasons that we went to war in the 1st place.

We invaded Afghanistan because they, like Lebanon and Hezbollah (1), willingly harbored those who bombed the US and killed 3000 INNOCENT people on Sept 11, 2001.

After Iraq invaded a peaceful, democratic Kuwait, and were driven back to Iraq, the UN required Saddam Hussein and Iraq (and Iraq AGREED) to allow investigators to inspect their WMD programs, to make sure that they were not attempting to produce any MORE Weapons of Mass Destruction (2), also under agreement with Iraq. Yet, Saddam Hussein repeatedly violated this agreement, playing "shell games" with the investigators, and oftentimes, outright denying the investigators entry to the facilities (3), forcing the U.N. to issue yet more mandates against Iraq (2). The World had no choice but to assume that this was an attempt to hide his aspirations and activities to make and acquire Worldwide Banned items. We already knew he had, and used, WMD's against his own people (WMDs are not only nuclear weapons, but also deadly gases and biological agents) (4), but that he had repeatedly attempted to buy nuclear weapons and facilities (5). The UN issued decrees 14 TIMES to Iraq that they were to come clean with these WMDs, which included his nuclear program. Not only that, but the US proved through bank transaction records that Saddam Hussein was also a financial backer of the suicide bombers of September 11 (6).

After the bubble that we were living in was shattered on September 11, we could no longer safely ignore Saddam Hussein. It was either him or us.

Here's a question for you. Say a judge ordered you to bring in your child so that the court might determine that the child was alright, and you, to the judge's face, told him "No". Do you think that he would just say "OK, just make sure to bring the baby in next time"? Especially if he thought that child was in danger or a danger to himself? Much less, do you think he would allow that to happen 14 TIMES before he put you in jail? This is exactly the same type of thing that happened with Saddam Hussein, AND THE UN ALLOWED IT TO CONTINUE!

So what if we didn't find any nuclear weapons! He violated the orders of the court by not destroying his OTHER WMDs and providing proof. The U.S. and our many allies were the ONLY ones with the GUTS to do anything about it! The U.N. not only did NOTHING about it, but it has also been proven by the Oil-For-Food investigators that high U.N. officers were being in Saddam Hussein's back pocket (7). No wonder they didn't want Saddam out of power, they were getting rich.

So, YES, we went to war with Afghanistan AND Iraq for right and perfectly legitimate reasons.

2006-08-11 11:35:42 · answer #1 · answered by Bodie 2 · 0 0

Assuming you are referring to the WAR ON TERROR. it looks like a war, it sounds like a war, it feels like a war, but is it really a war? foggy issues are often not classified as war as was the vietnam conflict. Yes its war...

As the american president, the safety and well being of americans, the economy and basic way of life should be top of the list.
after that the security of the other allies.

i think, overall, yes its the right reasons, but i think that there are too many side shows and shady deals going on that really discredits the orginal motive.

2006-08-11 09:51:26 · answer #2 · answered by Nick K 3 · 0 0

I honestly do not believe so. What would be the right reasons for war? That is kinda tough I think we were all pushed into this killing thing

2006-08-11 09:48:37 · answer #3 · answered by alwaysperfec237 3 · 0 0

I would guess is there ever a right reason for having a war?

2006-08-11 09:51:22 · answer #4 · answered by Gabe 6 · 0 1

Actually our regime ( mullahs of Iran ) is at war for wrong and malicious reasons in South Lebanon. Yesterday the members of Revolutionary Guard of Iran were among the dead found in Hezbollah sites by Israeli soldiers. In Iran, prisoners who are supposed to remain in prison for life are offered to go to Beirut in return for the amnesty plus USD 5000 for 2.5 months.Mullahs are selling our crude oil and the money goes to Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Lebanon and any other terrorists they can find on the earth. Based on mullahs official statistics 73% of our population ( 70,000,000 ) is in abject poverty.

2006-08-11 09:52:21 · answer #5 · answered by traveller 2 · 1 0

War and Reason do not belong in the same sentence.

2006-08-11 09:49:10 · answer #6 · answered by johngrobmyer 5 · 0 0

War is not always the right reason....

2006-08-11 09:48:27 · answer #7 · answered by celine8388 6 · 0 0

Bush is at war because he wants to make a name for himself. So the answer to that question would be NO!

2006-08-11 10:09:28 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I don't know. Such a question inevitably leads to one of motive, and whose are sincere and morally righteous, and whose aren't. Ultimately, it might be a matter of what is necessary. Necessity is hard to define, as some will see some claims of necessity as delusionary. But I think if you believe what you are doing is right, on some level it can be argued as necessary, especially if you're afraid of the consequences.

2006-08-11 09:50:35 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

To begin with I dont think we should be at war still...Its been like 4 yrs since sep.11. That should have been a quick war, so many have died.

2006-08-11 09:48:03 · answer #10 · answered by ME 3 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers