Did we really invade and occupy Iraq to remove Saddam ?

Question

Since there are no WMDs, was this in our best interest ?
Even BUSH admits there is no connection between Iraq and September eleventh, 2001. Or did we invade Iraq to " fight them over there -instead of over here " ? I am still puzzled why this war had to happen.

Rebecca: the only intelligence that supports this is tainted. It came from discredited expatrioti Iraqis and none of the professional CIA , NSA or DOD people believed this..Even Colin Powell knew this was false intel - stove piped through Cheney and Rumsfeld's offices to Bush.
This is why senior military officials objected to this war from the beginning.

CP Scipio..... uh ......thanks for sharing.
I bet the German Army was stabbed in the back by the November Criminals - just when it was about to win the First World War too. None of your claims can be substantiated. .

Tinker, so you are saying we had to invade a weakly defended country to see if it had WMDs ?
Most of the intelligence carreer professinals in the CIA, NSA, DOD had no proof they did - this is why Colin Powell had to get up and lie to the U.N.
I am most ashamed of my country for doing this.

Answer 1

The short answer to that would be no. Bush just wanted something to occupy his time and to focus the nation's attention elsewhere. It's like having terrible acne on your face, but then amputating your leg. You have flaws right up front, but in a hopeless act to have people "avert thy eyes," you end up making a bigger, more nonsensical mistake. Granted, my euphemisms suck, but you get the point, right?

On a side note, I decided to add that instead of being oil-hungry bastards, it would be better to go take out North Korea (or Iran; I'd settle for Iran too). They could really mess stuff up. Worse than 9/11. They have NUKES for God's sake!

Answer 2

Well the UN was suppose to force Saddam to live up to word to stop sponsoring terrorist but he just thumbed his nose a the world. If I remember right France, Germany, Russia, Great Britain all had the same info we did & all though he had WMDs. So after the Un sat on their A** and did nothing but talk, talk & more talk , the US took the bull by the horns and did the UNs job. Gw may not have done it right but at least he did something. Saddam is not paying young men & wemen $25,000 to blow themselves up anymore. That is now the job of the Syrains. Wars never go the way you want them to. Even when we leave Iraq the terrorist will try to destroy the United States. They will try here or overseas. I would prefer over there.

Answer 3

yes you did.
several thousand WMD shells have been found so far- some old, some new. Some have even been used against coalition troops in IED's.
yes, it was in your best interest because everyone (including french secret services and Clinton) thought Saddam had WMD plants working flat out.
There were links between Osama and Saddam. whether Saddam had anything to do with 9/11- no proof. However he was definetly helping Osama
Yes it is better to fight over there rather than over here. especially as the enemy has lost three safe bases and the US has the chance of gaining at least two friendly states.

Still puzzled?
I am puzzled why a champion would want to throw in the towel in the middle of a victorious game.
Because Dems in power will do just that

Answer 4

We invaded because there was intelligence from several agencies saying they had WMDs and there was a connection to 9/11. They found sites where terrorists were trained in Iraq.

Answer 5

1) Every intel service in the world thought Saddam had WMD's.
2) I don't recall Bush, or anyone else in the administration ever saying tha Saddam was directly involved in 9/11.
3) The REAL reason is that several members of the administration wanted vacation property.

Answer 6

Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria, Official Says

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Jun2006/20060629_5547.html


The proof that Saddam worked with bin Laden

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fnews%2F2003%2F04%2F27%2Fwalq27.xml

Plenty more where that came from.

Answer 7

If i remember correctly, it took an INVASION to find out that Saddam didn't have Md's. Removal of Saddam was Clinton's policy. Terrorist took it upon them selves to fight us in Iraq. No wonder you are so confused, when you only listen to liberal talking points. Why don't you broaden your intelligence?

I never heard of Iraq being a weak nation with MD. Is there any logic here? Every nation, every leader, and the UN said Iraq had MD. They could still be there, we also have no proof they're not.

Answer 8

He killed Kurds in massive numbers.

He wanted to annex Kuwait.

And he blew a 10 on the idiot-meter when he messed with George Bush II.

Best wishes,

pup

Answer 9

Because the Bush family owns oil fields all over America and without the competition of other countries oil being imported they can raise oil prices to whatever they wnat, dugh!!!!1 I just don't understand the situation!!!!Soldiers over there are being ordered to kill children and babies, since when did the America become so callused? Yes, people over there are using there babies as shields, so, if a criminal here in America used a baby as a shiel to protect him from police would it be okay for the police to go ahead and shoot? Where do we draw the line? We invaded their country, they didn't invade ours!!!!!!!!! Now we need to get out. Vote Democrat!!!!!!!!

Answer 10

the only reason we are in iraq is saddam tried to kill daddie in quait period. If you think saddam did anything to the usa sit down with pencil and paper and write down three things that saddam did to the usa. I do not like arabs and muslums but lets tell the truth while we are talking. i think we invaded iraq to get rid of saddam and now we can't get out of there without looking bad not that we don't already do .