2006-09-01 14:46:53 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
That would be a big NO. Iraq didn't even support any terrorists' groups at the time we planned the war. 19 of the guys who flew into the Twin Towers, pentagon, etc. were from Saudia Arabia and AlQueda was associated with Afghanistan at that time. George W. and his bright associates...Rummie, the ruthless little bastard as Nixon always referred to him and the others simply had their own agenda going.........finish up what Papa Bush didn't when we went into the Kuwait in the Gulf War.
2006-09-01 14:52:54 · answer #1 · answered by Cassie 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
No, there are a number of motives, however the significant reason could be that the UN grew to become into dealing with the Iraq difficulty with Saddam and if the clarification to invade grew to become into not the UN orders to Saddam and it grew to become into some element else, then the U. S. government lied to the worldwide and this is own human beings. I f the real reason could have been to kill Saddam (one guy or woman could have finished that) or to take administration of the oil fields (sturdy company merchandising administration could have finished that) or to make earnings for specific American company adult adult males (sturdy company merchandising administration could have finished that) or to locate and get rid of terrorist training camps (you will possibly could desire to invade and occupy the completed center East and the continent of Africa and factors of Europe and almost the completed worldwide. it would be a greater clever thought to not piss every physique off like invoice Clinton did with Bin weighted down and wreak the havoc of their revenge). Bullies constantly get it back worse interior the tip (data of it is the present economics and eternal wars that the U. S. is in touch with constantly). There are constantly different the thank you to handle human beings different than attacking them and forcing your will upon them. Hitler and the eastern tried it and what got here approximately with that? .
2016-10-01 04:53:20 · answer #2 · answered by marrone 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am definitely not one that that believes that tired old line of B.S. Bush had his own reasons for invading Iraq and it had nothing to do with the So-Called war on Terror
2006-09-01 14:53:53 · answer #3 · answered by bisquedog 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
They may have thought that Iraq had something to do with all this "War on Terror" stuff. Now they are simply trying to save face.
2006-09-01 14:54:31 · answer #4 · answered by bumpocooper 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
GW wanted to take out Saddam even before 9/11. Clearly his premise for invading Iraq (WMD) was a falsehood, which he sold to the American People. Now he says it was the right thing to do because we needed to get rid of Saddam. Do you thing the American People would have supported invading Iraq just to remove Saddam. I don't think so.
2006-09-01 14:52:50 · answer #5 · answered by Nefarious Eyes 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
nope,we get some many reasons as to why we invaded Iraq,it makes my head hurt,cant wait till we do some thing against Iran,the spin doctors will have a field day !!!!
2006-09-01 16:00:49 · answer #6 · answered by ? 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Never believed it. Our current administration bullied its way into this so-called war on terror. The UN found no weapons of mass destruction, neither did our armed forces.
We're doing what Hitler tried to do...world domination.
2006-09-01 14:52:13 · answer #7 · answered by Bub 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
The "war on terror" is a marketing phrase. It means whatever Bush wants it to mean. So, yes, the invasion to depose Saddam was part of the war on terror.
2006-09-01 14:51:41 · answer #8 · answered by coragryph 7 · 1⤊ 4⤋
Count me in!
2006-09-01 14:54:16 · answer #9 · answered by Mom of One in Wisconsin 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Everyone who knows Saddam supported and housed terrorists that would kill you and your entire family if they got the chance did.
2006-09-01 14:49:40 · answer #10 · answered by ? 4 · 3⤊ 4⤋