Bush was wrong from the beginning.
Sadam Hussein was a dictator and he deserved to be overthrown. But the idea of "teaching democracy" to Iraq was wrong and non-executable from the beginning. You cannot teach democracy from today to tomorrow. You cannot force democracy. The process of transformation should be slow and should be internally driven. You need wandering 40 years in the desert until a new generation grows up.
Additionally, the reason of existence of mass destruction weapons were entirely faulty. The only reason America went to was was controlling the oil of Iraq.
2006-11-14 07:33:06
·
answer #1
·
answered by blapath 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
I am a Desert Storm Veteran and saw first hand how the people feared Saddam. Even without WMD's he needed to be brought down. The Iraqi's have businesses, and schools, and electricity where there was none before. If you pay attention the insurgents are attacking places to keep the Iraqi government unstable. We are fighting a true just battle, but it is a different type of war than America has ever seen before. 2800 soldiers lost in 4 years are not bad numbers. Hundreds of thousands were lost on D-day. The media will not report the truth because they do not like Bush. But history will tell, and if you do your own research you will see what has been accomplished. Ask a soldier coming back how things are going. I have two friends over there now, one was my private when I was in the Army. He is now a sergeant, and if the Army would have me, I would be at his and other soldiers sides over there.
So, to answer your question, no it was not a mistake. It is just being miss reported.
2006-11-14 15:42:50
·
answer #2
·
answered by Just Another Guy 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Big mistake. This is a war on terror. How can you have a war on terror? It has no address, no country, It isn't a place or a people. How can anyone declare a victory over something like that? There are little terrorist groups worldwide. You can defeat a little group, but more will spring up. It's like trying to kill weeds in a forest.
2006-11-14 15:36:53
·
answer #3
·
answered by sexmagnet 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
NOT at all. It became a mistake when we did not have an idea to finish it. The American people should get behind our president and support his efforts to get this war done. I believe the MEDIA is the worst USA enemy. And the only ones suffering is our troops and the Iraqi people and not the terrorist. Matter of fact all terrorist are now celebrating our last elections.
2006-11-14 15:35:29
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Starting a war is always an error in human judgment. Defending your self is a different matter entirely.
2006-11-14 15:28:28
·
answer #5
·
answered by RoboTron5.0 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
Yes Bush should have not attacked, however we are there now and should not cut and run, we need to finish the job!
I think that if some dictator whats to hurt America, we should just kill him/her, and then support a government that will be an Ally of America
but we should not tell any one that we killed him/her
2006-11-14 15:28:26
·
answer #6
·
answered by TEXAS TREY 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
Of course it was. It was based on either a mistake that was made in choosing to believe faulty intelligence, or it was outright lies and dishonesty. It's hard to argue that it wasn't either one or the other.
2006-11-14 17:00:45
·
answer #7
·
answered by frenchy62 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
no offense but yes...the war in iraq is pointless...stop wasting american lives and let the middle easterns blow themselves up since that is what they are doing anyway
2006-11-14 15:28:58
·
answer #8
·
answered by jdconsultation_101 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
yes it was because going to war with Iraq did not do anything but kill our fellow soldier's.
2006-11-14 15:32:57
·
answer #9
·
answered by Veronica B 1
·
1⤊
1⤋
yes... a huge mistake.
Bush Jr. should have listened to his father, or at the very least listened to military advisors that recommended a force number at least twice the amount of ground troops.
2006-11-14 15:29:03
·
answer #10
·
answered by Jack C 5
·
1⤊
1⤋