English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Ganted, Iraq is a mess and in hindsight the US may not have been justified in invading. But, I see at least three major side benefits from the war:

1) The US has sent a strong message to unfriendly governments that if attacked by terrorists we will respond, possibly rashly, with MASSIVE military force.

2) We are keeping many anti-US Islamic militants busy doing damage over there, instead of giving them time and convenience to plot more attacks against US soil.

3) We did topple Saddam Hussien who was very anti-USA.

Who agrees? What other benefits are there?

For those against the war, do you acknowledge the above benefits?

2006-09-11 16:26:00 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Military

P.S. I fully believe that Saddam Hussien DID NOT have anything to do with 9/11. That is the point - we have sent a message that if attacked, none of our enemies are safe -whether they are responsible or not. Good message as far as I'm concerned!

2006-09-11 16:40:24 · update #1

9 answers

I agree with the benefits you listed. One thing lacking in a lot of the more diplomatic ideas for dealing with terrorists, is the idea that they view diplomacy as weakness. They understand power. It's all they know. Sad? Yes, but still a fact.

2006-09-11 16:31:46 · answer #1 · answered by MEL T 7 · 2 2

You're absolutely right. But here's a few things from the other side to think about (in no particular order):
1) The fighting in Iraq has been the perfect excuse (legit or not) for the gas companies to raise the price of gasoline outrageously high with little or no warning.
2) The mangled speeches by our president and rash decisions to go to war have also sent a message to the world that Americans are implusive and ignorant.
3) American soldiers are once again dying for a war they may or may not believe in.
Will you acknowledge the bad things about the war, too?

2006-09-11 16:36:23 · answer #2 · answered by spunk113 7 · 2 0

Diversion for one. While Iraq was being invaded Palestine was being trashed by the Israelis. And when the world was on the brink of a financial collapse war spending kept it spluttering on. The War on Iraq also forced up the price of oil which was a bonanza for the oil companies. Companies like Haliburton, Betchel and others have all gained huge contracts - effectively transferring wealth from American taxpayers to private hands and creating a massive inflationary spike (which also helped out the stock market that was otherwise heading downward before 9/11).

War is big money for some – if it wasn’t we’d probably live in perpetual peace.

If you still believe the 'war on terror' cover story. Or that Saddam was involved in 9/11 or was even a serious threat to the USA then you have been listening to too many bed time stories on Fox television - the blatand mouthpiece of bias and government propaganda.

2006-09-11 16:28:22 · answer #3 · answered by Bring back Democracy 3 · 1 2

Those big company friends of Bush and Cheney sure did a lot of money overcharging the gov't for the war in Iraq! Oil companies have all time profits ever since the war started.

2006-09-11 20:38:12 · answer #4 · answered by tyrone b 6 · 0 0

"The US has sent a strong message to unfriendly governments that if attacked by terrorists we will respond, possibly rashly, with MASSIVE military force."

So... when we're attacked by a terrorist group we attack a country that didn't have anything to do with it?

I will definitely admit that it's good Saddam's out. DUH. But come on.. Number one is a joke. I'm disgusted by the number of people who tie 9/11 together with Saddam. We were attacked by Osama Bin Laden. Not Saddam. NOT SADDAM! Saddam had NOTHING to do with 9/11. He didn't provoke us in any way. If we had to get him out we coulda done it the first time around and I wouldn't be complaining. But come on... Admit that he had nothing to do with 9/11.

{EDIT}

So wait... when 9/11 happened... we threatened people who didn't do it? Isn't that... I dunno... wrong?

2006-09-11 16:36:56 · answer #5 · answered by ? 5 · 0 1

The AP, AFP, CNN can sell their news easily with a higher price especially news regarding, Lebanon, Afhanistan, Iraq, Iran, North Korea. People want to know what happens there.

2006-09-11 19:01:21 · answer #6 · answered by Hafizul Azrin H 1 · 0 0

''paradox appearnce; deflate separate unhung euthanize unite
CONJURER! PURPOE VALUE: efficiencyunhung panultimate efficency; common love agitate efficacy, purpose lethargic amazing fix intensity, dxterity excllen,improvent alo ne important disorginized MRS ubiquitious laughterexile, basline MISS cpcity!! sympathetic epocexplcate taln; emit age drop convenienc, Kru cleft CONCESSION rafter explainleaders,obey exilitrated chills monmens, POOR KRUGER draw sey in absenita acculturation, nutcase commemorative OMNIPRESENT water habilitation, daunting POSITIVE obtainfood event, coy earn find probity KROto colleg e RETARDATION!! explicate knowledge mischvious accesible biotechnology finite amaible dossert WANT, WANT music KUKU guarentte layer,handlequiteconimi lov!!!! SUMMARIZE: KUKUI imminent personalbaggage: group adroit savage sincere immediately macarb, then likely software SHARING , skilfull boundary crook DACHAU, distingtinghuished gender equity LIMIT, PURPOSE humerous CLOSED!"

2006-09-11 16:54:20 · answer #7 · answered by squabblesquabble s 1 · 0 0

job security for the military

2006-09-11 16:41:20 · answer #8 · answered by ? 7 · 0 0

I agree, and there was more to saddam than that! He had to be stopped, he was a monster.

2006-09-11 16:30:40 · answer #9 · answered by Scatman 5 · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers