Saddam had his own people raped, killed, tortured and buried alive. Isn't that enough?

Question

Quit complaining about not finding the WMDs! Saddam needed to be shut down anyways. (Plus, the WMDs are probably in Iran or one of the other radical Muslim nations....pick one. He knew we were coming to look for them. Why keep them around when your neighbors will hide them for you?)

If the humanitrian resons were not motivation enough in Iraq, then why does everyone care about Darfur? Same thing, but the democrats just can't blame going there on oil.

Answer 1

Not enough. Isn't that essentially what Bush is doing to our military people? Will be doing to them till at least 2010. In his haste, Bush rushed into Iraq, before letting the UN finish its inspections. All caution cast aside. Troops not properly equipped.
Now, he wants to use diplomacy as the reason for not entering North Korea. A country that not only threatens us but in the process endangers the entire world. What's to keep them from selling off Nukes to the highest bidder. Terrorists. That doesn't fly with me.
North Korea is very aware of the fact that we are already stretched to the breaking point, in Afghanistan, and Iraq. They can see how things are going there. A very bad situation is on the horizon. And you can bet that if we do start something now with North Korea, that someone will stand beside them to defend their own interests. We must proceed with the greatest of caution. I just hope that Bush does not get an itchy trigger finger where North Korea is concerned. Our military cannot be stretched any further. That is without the draft being re-instated.
Look for that to happen, especially if our allies decide to pull out of Iraq. That's why Bush said it's time for change in Iraq. Bush will abandon that country to send our troops there to North Korea. Why do you think he's trying to get China, Japan, South Korea, Russia on his side. So we can invade North Korea.
We do humanitarian work all over the world. Why can't some other countries come together with us in this effort?
The thing I find the most distasteful with the Iraq war, is the simple fact that we were lied to by our leaders. Bush nor any of his administration said one word about the torture factor. Media told us that. Bush never said that the plan was to spread democracy. It was all WMDs.
Bush sees nothing wrong with torture, killing innocent people, or rape. It was Dubya's idea to write laws to allow torture, every day more of our troops are killed, innocent bystanders are killed every day. And what's being done about Foley, he solicited young boys through e-mails, possibly more, so the rape reason falls flat on its face too.
Bush lost focus in Afghanistan, essentially giving up on locating Osama. He is the one who led the attack on 9/11. Now there is a resurgence of the Talliban in Afghanistan. The situation is worsening there too. 'Nuf said.

Answer 2

the news never said anything about that but it true. the news and democrats only cares about the wmds or oil and they don't care about the victims of saddam. which should of been one of the reasons that they went over. and saddam and all the Muslims don't care about the women there. the only thing that they think that women are good for is, to have sex with them(rape) and clean house. that what pisses me off women are more then that.

Answer 3

At what point did I say I wanted to be a world cop? I don't remember writting that down anywhere that I would be happy to have babies to grow up and die to save other countries that don't even want us there to start with.

WE NEED TO TAKE CARE OF THE USA FIRST THEN WORRY ABOUT OTHER COUNTRIES. If the UN wants to form a army I think we should be part of it but not be a self proclaimed world cop.

Iraq was just a chip on Bush's sholder and nothing more. The biggest bully beat up the smaller bully.. That is all. Was it worth 3000 of your brothers and sisters lifes? We have been the cause of the death of over 600,000 Iraqies over the last 3 years. I don't remember any reports of Sadam killing that many in the whole 30 years he was in office. And Sadam was able to control his own country. We can't.

Answer 4

So why aren't we attacking North Korea and all the African countries? We won't attack North Korea because China and Russia will interfere. Many of the African countries are poor and they have nothing to give us. Many of them are worse than Saddam. Whether you like it or not many Middle Eastern countries are like that. The only reason that Bush went after Saddam was he knew no one would try and stop him. Iran and Syria were waiting so that they can grab parts of Iraq. The only person who could control Iraq was Saddam, no matter how bad he was. The country is worse now than when Saddam was in power. There was no humanitarian reasons for the attack. It was just the agenda of the Bush administration.

Answer 5

The arms inspectors said Saddam destroyed over 98% of his WMD's after the first gulf war, as he was supposed to under the surrender.

Humanitarian reasons? What about Darfur?

Answer 6

Maybe because the WMDs reason was what was pushed down our throats. That One morning we would wake up with a mushroom cloud.

All you're doing is showing your ignorance! Iran? Everyone knows that the biggest reason Saddam kept screwing around with the WMDs was to keep his neighbors guessing.

Answer 7

So, let me get this straight. You're saying that Iraq under Saddam's rule was the only country in the world where the dictator did horrible things to his people? Can you say "North Korea?" Can you also tell me why Bush hasn't invaded that country too so he can feed the starving people there? And tell me, what sane leader of any country would commit billions upon billions of dollars to "liberate" a country without asking for anything in return? OBVIOUSLY he's gonna ask for something in return, and that's to use Iraq as a puppet. It never had anything to do with WMDs, and "freeing" the Iraqi people.

Oh, also, explain to me this: is it even remotely logical to sacrifice over three thousand of your own soldiers' lives, not to mention the tens of thousands of Iraqi civilian lives, to get rid of a dictator? Hell, Saddam killed just as many of his own people...in a span of a decade, NOT three years. You must be one of those trailer park people I keep hearing about who's so easily manipulated....

Answer 8

yeah i see these commercials calling for bush to sen troops to darfur. I'm sure if he does do it he will be criticized by the same people.
two eight your a typical liberal. why do you have to offend the other side of the debate. you're the one that is acting like trailer trash.
freedomagenda.com see what the democrats said when clinton was in power. they change their tune when a republican took power.

Answer 9

What you say about Saddam is acurate, however, he did not cause 9/11 and there are AFrican countries with leaders as bad as he was. We should have finished off OBL fiirst and then gone after his cohorts i8n Saudai Arabia Fiugure it out baby the name of the game is oil

Answer 10

Isn't it ironic that Bush made millions by funding socialist Angola's "civil war" and never once condemned the country's use of child conscription? Or how Bush illegally used Burma slave labor to make shirts and jackets in his 2004 re-election bid?
Hell, Bush even held hands with a Saudi Arabian dictator who bars women from voting.
If you can't see past Bush's fabricated concern for human rights then you are blind.