why did the iraq war start?

Answer 1

If it really was all about the oil, we would have just opened ANWR like the majority of Alaskans prefer.

The problems leading up to the Iraq war were multitude, but in a nutshell, the United Nations seemed to feel that passing resolution after resolution was a perfectly acceptable way to deal with the situation.

The terrorists were emboldened by Clintons stunning lack of interest in the problem - just look up what happened after the first WTC bombing. Gads. Clinton also spent eight years slashing budgets for both the military and our intel agencies.

American intel agencies weren't the only ones who didn't know what was going on - international intel all pointed to Saddam having WMDs.

Finally, for those "Bush Lied" out there, I include the following quotes:

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." - President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

"There is no doubt that... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is using and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.


~*~*~

Happy Thanksgiving.

Answer 2

The war was started because EVERYONE thought Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. (I repeat EVERYONE thought Iraq did) and in fact they did, but not a substantial number.

Saddam Hussein(sp) had used WMDs in the past ON HIS OWN PEOPLE, and was always at odds with Iran. He said that he had WMD to deter an attack by Iran. He would not let UN weapons inspectors do their job and continuously restricted their access to weapons caches. All this lead the world to believe that he still had WMDs.

There were reports that his weapons were destroyed in the weeks leading up to the war, and like I said, there were some found.

Contrary to popular belief, the war was NOT started for controlling oil. If it in fact were, then we wouldn't have $2.30 for a gallon of gas (simple economics...supply and demand).

There very well might have been some personal vendetta for going in to Iraq for President Bush, but if someone tried to kill your father, wouldn't you want their butt too?

Answer 3

Saddam Hussein was still in power, and was a nemesis ever since 1990. After we got attacked on 9-11, Afghanistan was first, and despite what you hear nowadays, almost everyone (including France) thought that Iraq had WMD. Turns out we were wrong, or they went across the border before we got there. I for one hope that we were just wrong.

Answer 4

hello all, I'm a french user of Yahoo Q/A and I was wondering : hey why not checking the yahoo.com (here its is .fr) version ?
Well this question appears as one of the best I've seen. I'm not an anti american, the French aren't wild beasts and pro terrorism. (thats what we seem to be when I watch FOX News ...). But to answer the question,in my viewpoint, theres no reasonnable motivation ! And that should bring you to the question I'm asking to myself for several years now : Why did you elect G.W Bush ? and why did you RE-elect him ? His first presidency meant (to me at least) a big failure,so why giving him a second chance ? If someone can explain me, it will be great !

thanx for your attention and sorry for my poor english ^^
bye bye

Answer 5

The Bush Administration invaded Iraq to "get rid of the WMD's"
Now, with new evidence, we can conclude that Iraq never had such weapons at or before the time of the invasion. But, Cheney recieves a six-figure salary from Halliburton annually, and Halliburton acquires contracts for destroying Iraq AND reconstructing it. Also, we can protect Iraq's oil fields, so the main reason was $money$.

Answer 6

Saddam Hussein's defiance of numerous UN Sanctions imposed against him & his government, plus the allegations he had Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Answer 7

Im assuming by this question that you haven't been around lately?

The war started because Chaney, Bush and Blair saw dollar and pound signs in their eyes when they thought about all the Iraq oil they could steal - only they didn't realise just how much it was gonna cost everybody else for their "Faux pas".

Answer 8

Scapegoat, we had to pick someone that was "the route of all terriorism", since we have history and the country generall never liked Saddam anyway, he was the first choice

Answer 9

three reasons

1 oil
2 money
3 power

don't you know that what wars are always about money and also land is another.

Answer 10

this one has been worn out, but George bush went into office to get Saddam for trying to kill George h.w. bush and that is why we're in Iraq today.