Have to agree with the last two answers above. A prime reason was to rehabilitate his father's legacy after having been made a fool of by Sadam (who was trained by the G.H.W.Bush CIA, don't forget).
Another reason was to get oil flowing under the control of the "right" people. It also gave a reason to pull back in Afghanistan now that the opium trade is back in the hands that it was desired it should be.
2006-10-09 12:23:33
·
answer #1
·
answered by Gaspode 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
I have to point out to all who say that everyone was agreeing due to WMD. It was the intelligence coming out of the Bush administration that sold the idea to go to war in Iraq..Given the pre Bush, reputation of the United States, people were inclined to agree... Had the info of WMD report been truthful and accurate then the case was made.. But no WMD was found, which made people question the real motives of the war in Iraq.
Its not hard for a Government to supply false intelligence to provoke a desired response.. Its called propaganda and its used all the time.. It looks like that's the reason for the war in Iraq.
A false war, fulled by false propaganda, so Bush could save daddy's face and control the Oil.If you think other wise your a fool
2006-10-09 12:52:04
·
answer #2
·
answered by Shawn S 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
According to PNAC's website ( http://www.newamericancentury.org/... ), they want the United States, by way of economic and military force, to bring the rest of the world under the umbrella of a new socio-economic Pax Americana. The New World Order.
PNAC's ideology can be found in a White Paper produced in September of 2000 entitled "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century." In it they ominously describe four "Core Missions" for the American military. The two central requirements are for American forces to "fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars," and to "perform the 'constabulary' duties associated with shaping the security environment in critical regions." In order to bring this plan to fruition, the military must fight these wars one way or the other to establish American dominance for all to see. According to the Washington Post and The Nation, "Iraq as the tactical pivot, Saudi Arabia as the strategic pivot, and Egypt as the prize" in a war that would purportedly be about ridding the world of terrorism. On September 20th 2001, Bush released the "National Security Strategy of the United States of America" an ideological match to PNAC's "Rebuilding America's Defenses" report issued a year earlier, much of it word for word.
Vice President Dick Cheney is a founding member of PNAC, along with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Defense Policy Board chairman Richard Perle. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz is the ideological father of the group.
When Bush assumed the Presidency, the men who created and nurtured the world domination schemes of PNAC became the men who run the Pentagon, the Defense Department and the White House. On September 11th, when the Towers came down, these men saw their chance to turn their White Papers into substantive policy. The American people, anxiously awaiting some sort of exit plan after America defeats Iraq, will see too late that no exit is planned.
2006-10-09 13:30:51
·
answer #3
·
answered by tat2me1960 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
To ensure the Iraq oil isn't pumped out of the ground. This will cause the gas prices to rise without any overhead increase, now that the election is drawing near look at those prices drop, then after the election back up it goes. Of course they will have some story to tell us.
Companies like Exxon have been making a killing of us, because it costs them no more money to pump the oil.
That is the plain truth, if any doubt me look at the fruits this war has produce, who has gained and who has lost. The soldiers and the people of Iraq are the losers, where Exxon is making world record profits.
2006-10-09 12:44:54
·
answer #4
·
answered by tcmoosey 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
There are two sides to every story.
The side which has been presented to the public, based on WMDs, and/or terrorism is obviously not a true reason. So we have to look deeper.
Then we discover that the owners of the Federal Reserve, (a private company), actually control most things in the world, like most governments, and most of the world's resources.
Various names have been attributed to them, such as Illuminati, New World Order, Zionists, The Elite, Bunderburgers.
They are a few VERY rich families, who have their own agenda to control most of the world, to remove more than half the people, and to enslave the remainder.
Most people are either not aware of this information, or just consider it to be conspiracy theiry, and make slanderous comments. That doesn't change the facts, but just shows that the real situation is too big for most people to comprehend.
In order to understand it, you have to be capable of thinking in global terms, way outside terms of just America..
So, having said that, it is obvious that Bush started the war because he was instructed to do so. Presidents who do not follow instructions end up like JFK!.
An Illuminati Primer
http://www.rinf.com/news/nov05/illuminati.html
Rothschild/Rockefeller
The Architecture of Modern Political Power
http://dgwa1.fortunecity.com/fourthreich/rockroth.html
2006-10-10 17:15:02
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Here is the truth. We were attacked by terrorists who killed over
3,000 "innocent" lives in the U.S. Afraid that there were WMD
in Iraq and after several intelligences said that Saddam did have
them and might use them, Pres. Bush decided we'd better go
after them before they tried to use them against us. It took so long for the U.N. to send in WMD people, that Iraq had sense
enough to move them to Syria before inspectors ever even got
to their land. So, then none was found in Iraq and people got upset
with Pres. Bush. You must blame all the legislatures in D.C. then
as they all got the same intelligence reports and okayed US going
to war over there and even Pres. Clinton said Iraq had WMD. So,
why is everyone upset at Bush? He did get Saddam who was
hiding in a hole. Saddam is one bad dictator who buried his own
people alive (and naked) in huge pits together. He also used the
ingredients found in WMD on his own people which killed men,
women and children. We should applaud Bush for removing Saddam from the position he held while he abused and abused
plain citizens. What a monster. And that, my friend, is how we
became involved in the Iraq War in the first place. Understand
now? Someone had to do something and since the President is
the Commander, it was up to him to be the one to go forward.
If he had done nothing and we'd then had more terrorist attacks
in the U.S., citizens would then have blamed Bush again, so he
just couldn't win, could he?
2006-10-09 12:40:44
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
"Fair and balanced?" Ask the Iraqis if king bush's war is "fair and balanced."
There's a lot of documented literature how bush and his buddies wanted to invade Iraq since well before Sept 11. Bush used the terrorist attack to pursue his personal war. Just look it up...it's all documented.
2006-10-09 12:31:40
·
answer #7
·
answered by GoldnHart 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
Bush invaded Iraq to impress Jodie Foster. Actually, the Neocon plan was to invade Iraq to set up a pliant client state that would allow the U.S. to garrison a strike force to intimidate the other Gulf States, that could be used to insure the flow of oil to the West. Worked good, huh?
2006-10-09 12:23:57
·
answer #8
·
answered by iknowtruthismine 7
·
5⤊
1⤋
My fair and balanced answer is that we will never TRULY know the workings behind this war and it is not being revealed anytime soon. There is a lot of cover-ups going on, and I think it began that way.
Control of the oil, for one thing, and possibly to break up some of the powers in the Mid-East. It could even be something more obscure than those things.
2006-10-09 12:22:54
·
answer #9
·
answered by Cub6265 6
·
3⤊
2⤋
George Tennant who was under the Clinton adminstration told President Bush that it was a slam dunk of proving Iraq was hiding WMD and Tennant was in charge of the CIA at the time.Also Suddan failed to abide by the UN resolution for years and he kept shooting at our soldiers in the no fly zone and becoming more aggressive towards the United States.After getting the majority of the vote to go into Iraq it was done.Ted Kennedy,Hillary Clinton,John Kerry and many others that voted to go into Iraq and stated that Iraq was a threat have now changed their tune for the opportunity to denegrate this President.Bush is not perfect but he didnt go into Iraq on his own,he had lots of help.
2006-10-09 12:32:51
·
answer #10
·
answered by halfbright 5
·
0⤊
3⤋