now we understand that iraq has no weapon of mass dustruction and alqaeda has no link whatsoever with president saddam. it seems that US is A big liar because iraq has nothing to do with 9 /11.
2006-09-10 00:07:48 · 24 answers · asked by luqman_hakim 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
shazzam, you are funny.
iraq is soverign country. UN had nothing to do with this mess unless US direct them.dont you see it? Israel have more weapon, North corea is also have nuclear power, DID UN do anything? you really tickle my big fat tummy.
2006-09-10 00:22:10 · update #1
My opinion (and you know what opinions are worth) is we are fighting a grudge war in Iraq. It amazes me how often we blame our intelligence for mistakes but always seem to turn to them when we need to make a decision. Our intelligence told us there was no proof of WMDs there, inspectors told us they could not find signs of WMDs and other world leaders told us we were wrong. However; Bush is far smarter than other world leaders, he elected to ignore the advice of the majority of our allies. He has taken us into a war that has lost us a lot of world respect and the lives of many fine American men and women along with the quality of life those wounded in this grudge war will never again have. There is a silver lining in everything; in this situation - there is always room for the worst in everything, we now have a top candidate for the worst president in history. The not so silver is the fact I am one of those who helped get him into office!
2006-09-13 17:40:20 · answer #1 · answered by privateeye4U 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They did find weapons of mass destruction, though they were older, they were still deadly and could have been used to attack others.
The US, Germany, Britain, Poland, Australia, and the other countries that attacked Iraq did so because Iraq was not co-operating with UN inspectors and could not account for the known wmd let alone the suspected weapons. In addition there were some crimes against Saddams own people that he needed to be tried for.
It really had nothing to do with oil. We have never imported much oil from Iraq to begin with.
Wow there are some really misled people on at this time of day.
It had everything to do with 9/11. Saddam had used terrorism and chemical weapons against tribes within his country as well as other countries and was still producing chemical weapons against the word of the UN.
2006-09-10 07:11:26 · answer #2 · answered by sshazzam 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Ok, this won't get me best answer, but oh well. OIL. Really. Absolutely nothing to do with 911; all about the current administrations' greed. They are running this country on the fears of their own people. Even the Democrats won't stand up to them. It's all so very wrong. Time for the politicians to get us out of this war, impeach Bush, and give the power back to the voters that put them into office.
2006-09-10 07:11:22 · answer #3 · answered by just browsin 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Bush had a strong personal grudge against Sadaam; he absolutely hated him. This made him receptive to the ideas of his VP and his cabal of advisors.He had some advisors who were simply militaristic, others who wanted to settle old scores and reassert the power of the executive, and still others who had a grand vision that bringing democracy to the middle east would make the region safe for Israel. It was also thought that invasion and occupation of Iraq would bring many commerical opportunities (including oil), since Sadaam's state owned businesses would be turned into capitalist enterprises.
2006-09-10 07:10:51 · answer #4 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The US attacked Iraq because Saddam Hussein tried to kill the President's dad. And Texans don't stand for that unanswered.
2006-09-10 07:32:42 · answer #5 · answered by mysecondproject 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
To reduce the price of oil (by getting Iraq back in the market) and to stabilize the Middle East.
Whoops. Wrong on both counts!
2006-09-10 07:28:31 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Can you, and all who think like you, understand that 9/11 changed everything? I believe that the President acted in good faith with what turned out to be bad information from the Intelligence Community and other sources. Did you expect him to play hide-the-cigar while forces and nations hostile to the USA possibly prepared for another attack on us? He was wrong on the facts leading to war. He was right in not taking any chances for a repeat of 9/11 or worse.
2006-09-10 07:21:33 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
It's for the oil man! Bush wanted cheap oil! Remember that when you're at the gas pumps!
2006-09-10 08:48:25 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
They ignored 17 UN edicts, and they have shown that Saddam had links with al Qaeda, Saddam said that he had weapons of mass destruction, guess he shouldn't have lied.
2006-09-10 07:28:59 · answer #9 · answered by Zen 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Because of a very, very naughty man named Saddam Hussein
2006-09-10 07:13:03 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋