Libs - when is it okay to go to war?

Question

I can understand if you are upset that no WMD's were found, but Saddam wasn't exactly pouring out freedom over his people (mass graves, genocide, you know... fun stuff) So is it okay to overthrow a person who murders his own people on a mass scale, and if not, what would Saddam have had to do to make it "okay" for us to go to war? Please don't just yell out "Well Bush did this..." this question has nothing to do w/ the pres.

No one is answering the question... Libs - all I want to know, is when you would stand up and say its okay to go to war? Dont spout off anti-repub rhetoric. Just answer the simple freaking question

Answer 1

If anything it would be to save a tree or a bird. No, luckily they would just go on a hunger strike or hundcuff themselves in a big circle around a tree (they would probably accidently loose the keys) or something silly like that.

Answer 2

HERE'S YOUR ANSWER:

it's ok to go to war when someone kills 3,000 people in NYC... why do conservatives clearly care more about the genocide in Iraq than the one in NYC? what about getting Osama, shouldn't he be a priority over Saddam? After we get the man responsible for 9-11, then we can worry about the people in Iraq... sorry I have an "America first" attitude?

uh... I guess it's only ok when a Republican does it? what do you think?

Quotes from the right when Clinton committed troops to Bosnia (for the exact same murdering people on a mass scale as you say)

"You can support the troops but not the president."
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

"Well, I just think it's a bad idea. What's going to happen is they're going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years."
--Joe Scarborough (R-FL)

"Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?"
--Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99

"[The] President . . . is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation's armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy."
--Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA)

"American foreign policy is now one huge big mystery. Simply put, the administration is trying to lead the world with a feel-good foreign policy."
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

"If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy."
--Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of George W Bush

"I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning . . I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area."
--Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)

"I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our over-extended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today"
--Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is."
--Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)

Answer 3

When we are attacked or another country we are allied with is attacked. It would be nice if we were the true savior of the downtrodden in the world but then why aren't we in Darfur and 100 other places and yes it does have to do with the president. Its ok to go into a country where there is a viable resistance that does not hate us and is already fighting the government that is brutal only because when we over throw the tyrant we can hand it immediatly over to the resistance that was already there. Unlike Iraq where which had no resistance that was on hour side.

Answer 4

There are plenty of despots and repressive societies in the world today. Why Iraq? Why not N. Korea, Libya, Sudan, any number of African nations whose people suffer under repressive rule? Afghanistan, I could understand - the terrorists trained and hid there. Then we left the job half done and went into Iraq under false pretenses.

P.S. Like Saddam, lots of those govs and despots are OUR bast-rds. WE put them in power for our own questionable purposes.

I did answer your question. Afghanistan was justified because we needed to defend ourselves and eliminate the threat from Al Queda. Iraq was not. We should defend ourselves and our allies, not pre-emptively invade on the pretense of defense.

Answer 5

the point is not whether or not saddam hussein was a bad guy. the point is that there are PLENTY of other horrible dictators that commit genocide that we either leave alone, or give money to, that we DON'T do anything about. we only try to do something if the country in question has something that we want.

Answer 6

I don't know of one war that was started for anything other than power and ego and greed and money. I think we should refuse to fight. Every soldier in the world should just refuse. Then the governments would have to settle their differences by talking.

Answer 7

I don't exactly see us running into Darfur or Somalia with guns blazing right now.

Do you?

Maybe if we concentrated on Afghanistan more, the person who killed 3000 Americans may have been found by now. (This is a justified war.)

Answer 8

war should be the lasr resort!! not the first thing that comes to mind!!
try diplomacy first!!!
the UN investigated for WMD in Iraq and found NONE!!! that should be enough to not open this subject again.

Answer 9

WE FOUND WMDS IN IRAQ AND THE LIB I WORK WITH THINKS ITS NEVER OKAY TO GO TO WAR THAT IS WHY LIBS ARE CRAZY THEY WILL NEVER GET IT

Answer 10

don't spin doctor this on the democrat we were lied to we only believe want the right wing news media tell us