I don't have dates, but that was pretty much the selling point. Iraq is a member of the "axis of evil" and they have WMD which will be used on the United States and the rest of the free world. At least that's what we were all being told...even the United Nations.
2006-09-14 10:21:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
November 1998, at the urging of President Bill Clinton, the U.S. House of Representatives and the US Senate passed the "Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, which "declare[d] that it should be the policy of the United States to remove the Saddam Hussein regime from power in Iraq and to replace it with a democratic government."
On October 16, 2002 an Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 was passed in the United States House of Congress.
In November, 2002, UN Security Council Resolution 1441 was passed unanimously demanding that Iraq comply with its disarmament obligations as well as previous resolutions on human rights, terrorism and prisoners of war.
Beginning with a speech to the United Nations General Assembly on September 12, 2002 President George W. Bush began a public campaign to convince the world that Saddam Hussein was violating both the commitments he had made at the end of the First Gulf War and which prior UN resolutions dealt with: weapons of mass destruction, human rights, Kuwaiti prisoners of war, terrorism, long range SCUD missiles, the U.N. Oil-for-Food Programme and allowing UN inspectors to return to Iraq after their removal in 1998
On October 10, 2002 the 107th Congress of the United States passed HJ Res 114 titled "Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002." Among the reasons noted in the Congressional resolution authorizing force were, Iraq's non-compliance with U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441, aid to terrorists (PALF), a 1993 assassination attempt on former President George H. W. Bush (George W. Bush's father)and the Emir of Kuwait, in addition to violations of the no-fly zones.
In a January 27, 2003 report to the U.N., chief inspector Hans Blix, while noting Iraqi cooperation with regards to prompt access to inspection sites, stated "...Iraq appears not to have come to a genuine acceptance, not even today, of the disarmament which was demanded of it and which it needs to carry out to win the confidence of the world and to live in peace." The reasons for this include a failure to account for quantities of VX nerve agent and anthrax and also the inability of the U.N. to interview Iraqi scientists outside the country.
On February 5, 2003 Colin Powell attempted to convince the UN Security Council of the threat Saddam Hussein's regime posed.
The Bush administration also claimed that Iraq had ties to al Qaeda and other terrorists organizations, including the Palestinian Arab Liberation Front (PALF), HAMAS, Islamic Jihad, and Hezbollah. Bush administration officials also claimed that Iraq was reconstituting their development of nuclear weapons.
This site also has some explanations and some interesting info on ties to al-qaeda that were not explained in the senate report last week.
http://www.reasons-for-war-with-iraq.info/
2006-09-14 17:41:11
·
answer #2
·
answered by Wilkow Conservative 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
He was just doing what his father did'nt do,,invade Baghdad,,when you have the backing of your daddy's old administation behind you,,Cheney,Powell,Rumsfeld,etc,,they all wanted to cash in on the profits and a little revenge from the first gulf war,,Republicans will disagree,,just because they see no wrong in there puppet master,,but look at the facts,,No Weapons of Mass Destruction,no serious threat from this 3rd world country,nothing,,Suddam was a evil dictator yes,,but is it worth the chaos we have created,,they should have just assasinated him and see what happened,,but when you have special interest in our all mighty repulicans,,Haliburton for one,,which has Cheney and a few others in their pocket,,you have a war for oil and greed,,,Believe what u want,do the research yourself,don't listen to all your told,,not even me,,educate yourself and make up your own mind,,not just the easy,closed-minded way that most of us Americans do....Believe everything we are told,just because our leader believes in God, they think he is an all mighty ruler,,sorry but I have my own mind..
2006-09-14 17:31:29
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
With no weapons of mass destruction there was no reason for invading Iraq
2006-09-14 17:50:53
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anarchy99 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
Saddam tried to kill Bush Sr. Can't give you the date. Sorry. Also, Cheney was the past CEO of Haliburtin which got the no-bid contract. He still has lots of stock. ........One more. George W stated that he was a war president & war presidents are re-elected.
2006-09-14 17:29:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by shermynewstart 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
That was the big one. The big lie I should say. His team was in high gear promoting the war all the way from just after 9/11 to the invasion.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
For those interested in 9/11, the Iraq war, etc. check out this website: http://www.wanttoknow.info/9-11timeline60pg
It's a time line of events surrounding 9/11 from the 70's to the present. Each entry is referenced with articles in the main stream media. No theories, just facts.
2006-09-14 17:21:46
·
answer #6
·
answered by Jagatkarta 3
·
1⤊
2⤋
Simple, Operation Iraqi Liberation (O.I.L.)
2006-09-14 17:21:59
·
answer #7
·
answered by Nemrac rocks 1
·
1⤊
3⤋
He and the Veep both mumbled a lot about connections between Hussein and bin Laden but that was as bogus as the rest of their hocus pocus.
2006-09-14 17:26:46
·
answer #8
·
answered by DelK 7
·
0⤊
3⤋
No reason for the Iraqi war. He is a idiot and a moron. We shall impeached him. And no such thing as "weapon of mass destruction".
2006-09-14 17:21:13
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
4⤋
None except Iraq was a terrorist nation and al queda was there and Osama and Saddam were buddys, planning to take out Isreal and then he changed it to take out Saddam, and then he changed it to building a democracy, I haven't read todays paper so I don't know what he has changed it to now.
2006-09-14 17:23:49
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋