If Iran actually poses a threat, why did we attack Iraq?

Question

I have a free period and we have computers everywhere around my school.

Answer 1

Iran is next

Answer 2

We did not attack Iraq so to speak, we intervened. Yes, we do know that Saddam did have WMDs the problem was that we gave them enough warning that we were coming that he had time to move them into Iran and Syria (Syria abruptly closed it's borders and would not let the UN or any Allied forces in to their country, tells us they are hiding something. Also the fact that Syria was a close Allie to Iraq raises suspicion to why they are doing this). The only reason we are still in Iraq is to help stabilize the new government. People say we should be in Saudi Arabia, but Saudi has been very cooperative with the UN and with the US troops, we also have bases set up in Saudi. The Saudi government also confirmed that the 9/11 attackers were not Saudi citizens. Afghanistan claimed resposibility for the attacks and claimed that the attackers were their citizens. We are still in Afghanistan fighting.

Answer 3

By invading Iraq we captured a strategic position.

Think about it:

The list of problem countries in the Middle East as of 9-11-2001 was:

Afghanistan
Iran
Iraq
Syria
Saudi Arabia

If you are in school you should find a map of the Middle East and take a look at it.

Notice that we now have Iran surrounded with land forces to their east and west and naval forces on the Gulf and to their south. This allows us to exert pressure on Iran without actually fighting.

Next notice that as of this moment we have military forces either in or next door to the countries identified as problems after 9/11. Again this gives us the ability to exert pressure without having to actually fight those remain nations.

The enemy knows this - why do you think they are trying to get you to force our withdrawal from Iraq?

Answer 4

EASY!!!! Iraq looked like a push over crush there army put in a new govt and have land bases right next to Iran. Iran would have to either do as there told or get blasted like Iraq. Well so much for that theory though there are some idiots in the administration who still believe this garbage. Cheney and rumsfeld being the true believers in this stupidity.

Answer 5

We attacked Iraq because we wanted to break the OPEC stranglehold on us. Iraq has the world's second largest oil reserves and it was too tempting a target for occupation given the post 9-11 appetite for action in the middle east.

Answer 6

David...continue learning in school. The way you phrase your question seems to be phrased in a way that one of your teachers is against the war in Iraq and is making some wrongful conclusions. Not all teachers have their facts. Sadaam Hussein continued to defy the United Nations with many security counsel measures passed. Also, Saddam would fire missiles at our planes in the no-fly zone. That in itself is an act of war. Also, Saddam Hussein was paying suicide bombers to kill innocent people. That is an act of terror. And if your teacher recalls...President Bush stated after the 9/11 killings that any nation supporting terror would be a target. INCLUDING IRAQ.

Answer 7

Iraq posed the biggest threat at the time. We are watching Iran. I suspect that Israel will deal with Iran so we won't have to. Iran has vowed to destroy Israel and with nuclear capability near, Israel will act to prevent attack from Iran.

Answer 8

Angus Walker, a Beijing-depending correspondent with NBC guidance' significant different ITV guidance, said the present consensus replaced into that North Korea did not have a missile that replaced into able to wearing a nuclear warhead. "there is often diverse saber-damn even as the U.S. and South Korea degree large-scale protection pressure workouts," he said. The North does have smaller missiles, as considered for the era of protection pressure parades, and South Korea's capital Seoul is interior artillery decision. jointly because the North has interior the previous threatened to hit Seoul with a "rain of fireplace," claiming it would want to launch 250,000 artillery shells in an hour on the South Korean capital, in actual shown actuality that those artillery batteries might want to wish to be destroyed very at present, Walker said. conflict-interest situations have suggested that a conflict on the peninsula might want to be over at present, with the North less than U.S. and South Korean administration interior 24 hours, he said. inspite of the easy shown actuality that, Walker suggested the nightmare situations are that the North might want to wish to by technique of a few ability get a truck-loaded gadget into the South or launch a "dirty bomb" in an artillery shell. so as that they could be in basic terms giving off warmth air as favourite.

Answer 9

just hypocrisy, poor Iraq is destroyed and no one except Saddam can rebuild it. Actually Saddam should have been brought to negotiable table and things could have been set right thru him only still time is there and let him handle the country install him again and Iraq is yours till Saddam is there and then his party would handle it.

Answer 10

You know America.Attacking the weakest.Then joining the party and attacking the strong and gaining respect from the world once again.

Answer 11

Because it is easier to attack a country when you have a "reason" even if your reason is personal or false!!

"In Houston, where former President Bush currently resides, the President spoke at a fund-raising event and referred to Saddam Hussein as “a guy that tried to kill my dad at one time,” lending credence thereby to the theory that Mr. Bush's war has more to do with personal revenge than national security"