What does Iraq have to do with the attacks on the World Trade Center on 9/11/01?

Question

According to Bush himself....and I quote.."NOTHING.." Dont believe me?? see and hear for yourself in his own words.

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/08/21/bush-on-911/

Answer 1

Nothing, nothing at all. But somehow that's what triggered the attack on Iraq... Meanwhile, the guy responsible for 9/11, bin Laden, is simply free and we're not looking for him anymore.

Cons are still scratching their heads about that one. What a bunch of ignorant morons!

Answer 2

Nothing, nothing, and nothing. It wouldn't be so bad if we had proof that this Administration believed that to be true right up until we invaded Iraq. Unfortunately, we now know they knew the intelligence was flawed and moved ahead regardless - being quite happy to let the rest of us wallow in the lies. I find it ridiculous that we impeached a President for lying so his wife wouldn't find out he cheated, but we let Bush remain in the White House after waging war with our children's lives based on a boatload of lies. I'm not saying it's okay that Clinton lied to the American people, so don't go off on that. But really, it is so hard to see the gulf between these two wrongs as being as large as the Grand Canyon? The word impeachment is being whispered in the halls of Congress as we sit here and debate. When the Dems win back the majority in November I fervently hope they go full steam ahead with impeachment proceedings.

Additional comments: I'm astounded at the amount of people still clinging to the idea that Hussein engineered 9/11. Wait a minute folks - the President himself has acknowledged, and not happily, that that simply is not true. He has ACKNOWLEDGED that Iraq didn't have anything to do with 9/11. So let me get this straight, you back up the President's actions by insisting on believing something even HE now admits is not true? Talk about delusional.....

And to those claiming it was all about weapons of mass destruction? Please.... This administration took every opportunity it could to link 9/11 and the war on Iraq. Were you sleeping while this was going on or just have selective memory?

Answer 3

Though 9/11 was the most spectacular act of Terrorism perpetrated on the USA, it was by no means the only one. The problem with Saddam was that he sponsored terrorists in general, he was giving on average $10,000 to the families of suicide bombers. He obviously had it in for the USA especially since we kicked his behind in 1991. Bush senior made the big mistake of listening to the UN and respecting world opinion when he didn't take Saddam out then. That's why I prefer the son. He doesn't listen to the UN and doesn't care about world opinion above the well being of the USA and neither do, though I was born in Europe and all my relatives are Europeans.
In conclusion, you do not have to have participated in 9/11 to be an enemy of the USA.

Answer 4

for 3 motives. Bush should be stated as large contained in the heritage books, and concept invading Iraq and being a conflict President became his brilliant shot at it. Cheney had to help improve Haliburton with governmenent contracts, and stealing the Iraqis' oil. Rumsfeld needed everlasting bases. 3 awful motives for this awful conflict. the justifications they CLAIMED to flow to conflict were that Iraq became behind 9/11 (which it wasn't), and that he had guns of mass destruction (which he did not). the persons telling us those issues knew they were mendacity.

Answer 5

1-from 19 suicide how attack USA at 11/9/2001 15 from Saudia
2- there is only 3 country in the world support Taliban regime before 11/9/2001 Saudia one of them the other country is Pakistan and UAE
USA must attack Saudia not Iraq because 15 from 19 came from KSA

Answer 6

According to Debka Files about 5-6 years ago, Iraqi troops were massing at the far West of the country near the tri-border area of Iraq/Syria/Jordan. It appears Israeli intel believed Iraq and Syria were going to launch an attack, and that many special forces types of those units had already infiltrated into SW Syria and Az Zarqa, Jordan (alleged home of Zarqawi).
I'm to understand through reading many intel analyses (open source) materials from gov think tanks like Rand and Stratfor, that the security of the State of Israel is the #2 key geo-political interest of the UK and USA (just behind their own security).

I asked a friend of mine that retired from the CIA after over 20 years (if they ever truly retire) saying that I smelt American intervention coming to Iraq and and possibly Syria, and he told me to dismiss Debka as it was an unreliable source.
First 9/11 happened. Shortly thereafter, after massing troops in Saudi and Kuwait and razing and occupying Afghanistan, we went into Iraq. Lastly, this most recent clash between Hizballah and Israel.
Do the math - we're in Iraq for oil and the security of the State of Israel. However, that being said, there were evidences of terrorist links to Iraq, and WMD proliferation in "rogue states" of the Middle East has been a global concern since about the 80s.
Cheers

Answer 7

Nothing, 9/11 was used by Buash as just an excuse to do the following:
1.) Keep US Military Establishment happy (read: Use weaponary, Re-arm etc. Basically initiate mass gov't spending for the likes of Haliburton, Raethon, you name it. All Republican donors)
2.) Keep the Jewish Vote Happy: By using the US army as footsoldiers for Israel in getting rid of Saddam.
3.) To great pleasure of major US oil Companies by a) de-stabilizing the price of oil by sending the mid-east into chaos, and, b) Creating our own next pumping station in the middle east as Saudi puppets are increasingly unstable after years of gluttony.

Any others?

Answer 8

That Edward K is a moron. Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9-11. I can understand going to Iraq to rid the world of Sadam (much like Hitler in WW2)..HOWEVER..dont lie to us and tell us its because of this or that. Its strange to me why we invaded and occupied a country right after 9-11. Why didnt we invade and occupy Afghanistan? Syria?...etc. I just dont get the rationale given by the US Govt.

Answer 9

The libs keep spouting this off like the Republicans say that Iraq was the one behind everything with the 9/11 attacks. Quite simply, we/they do NOT.

What Iraq did was violate the terms of the cease fire, and the long overdue continuation of the first was started. Iraq was a threat to peace and stability in the region. Iraq did violate the terms of cease fire. The attacks and overthrow of Saddam's Iraq WAS justified.

Answer 10

Everyone agrees that Iraq was not directly related to the attacks, we always have known this. The link is that Islam has declared Jihad on the USA. Iraq is a hostile nation full of Muslims. Muslims use terror to fight the Jihad. The USA must eliminate all hostile nations full of Jihadist Muslims in order to win the war against terror. BIG PICTURE!! I know it's hard for most people to see, but stand back and open your eyes.

Unless you want to convert to Islam you had better support Bush and whoever else has the goal of stopping Jihad.

Answer 11

"Unless you want to convert to Islam you had better support Bush and whoever else has the goal of stopping Jihad."

This is exactly the terror tactic the governmnet uses to justify their wars. The muslims do not wish to "convert" America. Jihad is their religious duty to fight the INVADERS and PERSECUTORS of their beliefs. This coming from an athiest who thinks all of these religions are stupid and cause more suffering and deaths than the good they were intended to bring to people. Christians have been fighting Muslims for thousands of years now people, this is just another chapter in the saga.. another "Crusade" in the name of Christianity. Ah well these things happen when you elect neocon religious nuts into office.