the year is 1998 and we attacked Iraq because they had weapons of mass destruction, Clinton misled us because they obviously had no wmd's
2006-11-01 05:48:50 · 7 answers · asked by April N 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
i'm outraged that we arn't bombing the heck out of it.
every day till it's flat. then we move to iran
2006-11-01 05:52:52 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Outraged, yes I am, but not for what the U S did to the people of Iraq, rather why. If the U S Government would like to rule the world there is only one way to do so...crush all your enemies, establish your laws and enforce them with an iron fist. For some strange reason this method was not used, therefor the U S at temps will sadly fail.
2006-11-01 14:08:08 · answer #2 · answered by mr.chrisrolle 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No! there is a difference between beating up a dictator to get him to stop playing games and allow us to confirm his compliance and invading Iraq to confirm his compliance. Now we've lost 2800+ 20,000 wounded for what? Just so some redneck in a bar some where can say yeah! we kicked Saddam's butt ooooUUUUU !!! WEEEEE!!!!! got em good bubba ray! Now we are stuck there making things much worse and no end in sight real smooth.
2006-11-01 14:05:53 · answer #3 · answered by brian L 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Have you been living with your head in the sand over the last several years or are you just trying to ignite another debate?
2006-11-01 14:03:36 · answer #4 · answered by j H 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
we wnet in in 98 because iraq invaded kuwait no for wmds, p.s. i think we should have bombed iraq back to the stone age
2006-11-01 14:01:19 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
well i am sure people in Iraq were
2006-11-01 13:56:13 · answer #6 · answered by Hafeman 5000 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
YES! But, check your dates!
2006-11-01 13:55:39 · answer #7 · answered by soulsearcher 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋