Iraq was not responsible for the 9-1-1 and the bombing of the Twin Towers.
Saddam was not responsible for this either.
There are other dictators that are worse that we did not interfere with.
We've put ourselves into a situation where we may never get out.
There are no weapons of mass destruction
We've lost a lot of good people
A lot of innocent people have been hurt by this conflict.
The terrorists are from other countries besides Iraq.
2006-09-02 18:27:39 · 21 answers · asked by Searcher 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I agree 100% and more if it were mathematically possible-!!! We did a foolish thing in Viet Nam in the 1960s, and we did another foolish thing here-!! Bush's own 9/11 Commission said that Iraq did NOT do 9/11-!!! I fail to see how so many people (still) believe that Iraq HAD weapons of mass destruction, but that they "hid them." What in the name of apple blossoms would they have been waiting for to use them-??? After we invaded there and we were coming after Saddam at full-gallop, if they had had anything to hurt us and our efforts, they WOULD have used them-!!! This whole mess is insane, in my opinion-!!
2006-09-02 18:33:21 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
The world doesn't miss Saddam now that he's gone. It's probably good on the whole that he's out. I commend the military for doing a military's job at the beginning of this conflict to take Baghdad. That's where they lose me, however. The military did great, but the people doing the strategy behind the military have their head up where the sun don't shine. They have made a complete mess of things, didn't listen to good advice, didn't understand what they were getting us all into, didn't even bother to examine WMD evidence to find out if it was true, and God knows what other lies they told just to "get Saddam" for reasons that are still unknown. Should we have gone to Iraq in the first place? Maybe. But certainly not with the bunch of incompetents that actually planned it. And now we have this mess to clean up. This is the Bush legacy. In 50 years they will open up the archive and find out the real reason why Saddam was such a threat to the Bush family, and then people (who might still be alive at that time) will shake their heads and say "How could America have let this happen?"
2006-09-03 01:39:38 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Bush is a lot of things but most of all, he's most guilty of - being misinformed. I find it odd that no one criticizes the CIA or the intelligence community for giving Bush/Blair bs information on the situation. Terrorists have existed forever - I was teargased on a Paris metro in the late 80's; bombs went off in the Latin Quarter it was nuts. Terrorism has always been around. Yes, the terrorits are from Iraq and Saudi and Yemen and Syria. Have we forgotten that Saddam invaded Kuwait and set their oil fields on fire and polluted the world? We went in thinking 'wmd'...and honestly, I'd rather err on the side of going in and kicking some @ss vs. waiting in fear wondering forever if they 'really' did have them. At least we know now......onto N. Korea and Iran...where's the rest of the world? Why are we always policing the world?
2006-09-03 01:37:39 · answer #3 · answered by bcbound 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Now the Islamic countries are split. It was brilliant to take Afghanistan and Iraq. Iran is now up against the wall. They are very paranoid now. They seem to bringing this upon themselves, when simple negotiation would lighten the hostilities. Iran is on the verge of developing nuclear weapons independently. With their attitudes and possible involvement in hostilities in Iraq this could be a volitile situation.
2006-09-03 01:47:15 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Nope...
Taking out Saddam to install a pro-western democracy in the middle of the Arab nations was a GREAT idea, not to mention the fact that it stopped Saddam from supporting terrorism and personally sending $25,000 to the family of every terrorist homocide bomber...We took out Saddam in just a few weeks with almost no losses....Great idea...WHO could have predicted that the Muslims would rather kill each other than form a free and democratic nation.
We are keeping the Suni's and the Shites from having a civil war and at the same time fighting terrorists who want to take over the beleagured nation.....And liberals want to cut and run...Figures..
2006-09-03 01:33:58 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
We shouldnt of gone over there but that is the past n we cant change that now. Its no longer considered a conflict its a war n they do have weapons of mass destruction there is one of 2 things they did with them one they sold them 2 foreign countries or they still have them because we gave them 2 them.
2006-09-03 10:59:33 · answer #6 · answered by ken 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
what ever happened to finding Osama?
how in the world can anyone in their right mind say "we should take out this country that hasn't did anything do us, before we worry about those that killed 3,000 in NYC?"
we need to go on a "Kick *ss and take names" mission and go where ever we think Osama could be... we have 10 TIMES the justification to go after Osama than we do for anything we did in Iraq...
in fact I would say 3,000 times...
if we even think Osama is in your country... either get out of the way or fall under our tanks... those are your two choices...
BUT NO... we're in iraq... NOT TAKING OUT TERRORIST LEADERS... NOT GETTING OSAMA... at best we're killing a few low level terrorists that Osama sent to keep us busy while he plans more attacks...
nice... I didn't think even Bush was this stupid...
and Republicans... quit being pansies and get Osama already... he punched us in the eye and it's long time we kill him... no excuses...
there would be plenty of time to deal with saddam after we got Osama... first things first... remember 9-11?
Smartassawhip: WHY DON'T YOU ACTUALLY USE SOME OF THOSE FACTS TO SUPPORT YOUR STATEMENT... OH THAT'S RIGHT... THERE AREN'T ANY... hahaha... clown
2006-09-03 01:44:50 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think your ignorance of the actual conditions in the world is showing. You must be a liberal who believes emotional slogans instead of using logic and reason to critically compare propaganda with what actually happens in the news day by day.
2006-09-03 01:40:36 · answer #8 · answered by Smartassawhip 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
We were Right going in but shouldn't have let politics govern the war.
The liberals that wanted a soft touch got their way & now, it's off course.
You don't win conflicts by being nice to your enemy.
THat's called "appeasment".
If you want humanitarian help, send in humanitarian groups.
Don't hair-lip our Fighting Force.
2006-09-03 01:38:27 · answer #9 · answered by mnm75932 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
We cannot change the past. We need to look forward, or be left behind.
It's pointless to argue whether we should have gone over in the first place. Let's get past the first place, and move on.
We went over there. Can't change that now. We deposed Saddam. Few argue that was a bad thing. We toppled the old government. Done. The question is, what are we still doing there years after "Mission Accomplished".
2006-09-03 01:31:00 · answer #10 · answered by coragryph 7 · 1⤊ 4⤋