He wants sanctions slapped on both countries for their nuclear programs, but somehow Iraq was "different" for him to just skip sanctions and go right for an invasion? Howcome no sanctions were placed on Iraq?
2006-10-21 18:38:30 · 14 answers · asked by Loathe thy neighbor. 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Yeah, well, Iraq wasn't running any nuclear programs like Iran and Nth. Korea are. So why did he take strict actions on Iraq, but he's not on Iran or N. Korea?
2006-10-21 18:47:53 · update #1
Sure, sanctions were slapped on Iraq, but were sanctions slapped on Iraq for it's so-called "nuclear program"? Or did he just up an invade it? The UN found no WMDs, yet he invades it anyway?
2006-10-21 18:52:58 · update #2
Well, if he invaded it for oil, he's not blessing any of us with it. Look at the price at the pump.
2006-10-21 18:58:39 · update #3
Sanctions on Iraq were imposed immediately after their invasion of Kuwait in August of 1990. Sanctions continued until the U.S. invasion in March of 2003. Iran and N. Korea have also had sanctions imposed on their nations for decades. The real question is: why was Iraq, as a member of the 'axis of evil', singled out? Hmmmm.?
Maybe because it was the easiest military out of the three to defeat? After 9/11, the U.S. public wanted it's pound of flesh. Iraq, with it's flamboyant/despotic/arrogant leader, was fresh in the minds of the public. Saddam Hussein was a well-recognized leader. Moreover, his military/industrial complex was crushed, and never recovered after the Gulf war. Yet, invading Iraq was a guaranteed 'victory' for the administration; at least in the short term. It bolstered their 2004 platform by perpetuating fear/terrorism with an identifiable, albeit, false enemy threat. A threat that is no longer false, thanks to our unwarranted invasion!
Simply put, Iraq had few friends. We were able to get away with it! N. Korea has China. Iran has Russia. The latter nations both have security council vetoes. HOWEVER, it can be successfully argued that neither Iran nor N. Korea would have been able to rely on such shields if they were complicit in the 9/11 attacks!
The U.S. had global support/a 'blank check', to seek justice w/respect to the 9/11 attacks. This opportunity was squandered!
Our global leadership has been severely diminished! As a result, our responses to the current threats from Iran/ N. Korea, carry much less weight!
We can only blame ourselves. The American public has enabled this course to be continued.
When will we wake up and change it?
2006-10-21 20:40:58 · answer #1 · answered by colhadley 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Tthere were sanctions in force against Iraq. Saddam was allowed to trade oil for food. As regards the war, well, i believe the US and UK used Iraq as a test case to see what the international community would do if they invaded regardless of overwhelming condemnation. The answer to that being nothing. The UN just let them get on with a totally unjustified invasion. Sad really.
2006-10-21 18:47:06 · answer #2 · answered by dingdong 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There were sanctions on Iraq! That isn't the issue! The issue is why are THEY WILLING to just accept sanctions!
Quick answer! N'Korea has no oil and the last time we visited them we had 33, 741 military dead and 103,000 wounded! We had 1.7 MILLION military in the Far East, and a 5.5 million man Army! Today we have 1.5 Million men in the service and 105,000 are in Iraq!!
We don't have the troops to attack ANYONE!!!
China is a baker of N'Korea! China will not be on the side of the US and I can tell you that over 1/2 of the military we have in S Korea will die by day #2! This is not the Iraq army you are screwing with!
2006-10-21 18:48:03 · answer #3 · answered by cantcu 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Cause Iraq didn't have nuclear weapons and... well.... Everyone knew this... They made a 25 thousand page report on their chemical, biological and nuclear programs proving that they didn't have nuclear weapons and, of course, the US rejected this.
The reason of such a pathetic invasion which lasted such a pathetic ammount of time (in which almost no US soldiers were killed... They were killed AFTER the main conflict) is, of course, oil...
And everyone knows this...
But everyone keeps quiet...
They also could invade Iraq directly with no fear of being attacked because they knew Iraq doesn't have WMDs, however, they can't do this with N. Korea or Iran cause it could be catasthrophic (however it's spelled)
2006-10-21 18:50:58 · answer #4 · answered by kiriyama 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
First off, Iraq had santions on it for YEARS and NONE of it worked. Remember the U.N. food for oil scandals that had Russia, China, France and Germany (the wars biggest opponents) caught with billions of dollars going to and from Iraq illegally? Also, North Korea received ALL of its sophisticated nuclear technology from the previous administration, same with Iran so President Bush went into those situations with his hands tied and is doing the correct actions, ignore their statements and making it harder for those countries to be involved with the world. Geo-politics is more complicated than just anti-Bush.
2006-10-21 18:42:21 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
The WMD found in Iraq (so a concepts) encompass some old artillery shells which contained mustard gas and Sarin. Use of such WMD is illegitimate by technique of global convention, and however if licit, does no longer be of a lot use adversarial to militias and insurgents, who opt to cover between possibility free civilians. this is been suggested that very nearly each and every of the Iraqi WMD (amounting to countless thousand a number of of fabrics) were moved to Syria in June 2002. those might want to contain organic and organic units and nuclear equipment, yet very nearly certainly no longer operational nuclear units. For the reason given above, using one in each and every of those guns is contraindicated.
2016-12-05 02:26:28 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Iraq was under UN sanctions for nearly a decade. Anything else?
2006-10-21 18:41:29 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Iraq had plenty of warning and threats before the war and was totally uncooperative. The UN did nothing. Saddam played all kinds of games with stalling tactics (just like the clown uses in court during his trial). I think that Bush realizes that we can't go to war anywhere else in addition to Iraq and Afganistan. We would be spread way too thin.
2006-10-21 18:50:47 · answer #8 · answered by brat789456 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
US is afraid of North Korea because it is an ally of China. It is also afraid of Iran because of what happened in Iraq. Thus, the US is very careful of what to do.
2006-10-21 19:23:25 · answer #9 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
he is Iraq had sanctions on them but they broke them and we our military has said that they have found WMDs
2006-10-21 20:22:36 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋