English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2006-11-26 15:41:39 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

21 answers

We didnt blame afghanistan, alqaeda claimed responsibility and subsequent videos showed the hijackers meeting with bin laden. the Taliban harbored alqaeda, so we took the war to them for harboring people who killed our citizens.

We went into Iraq because of the 1% doctrine. In a war post 9-11 we couldnt tolerate the remote possibility of a rogue regime (like Iraq) providing WMDs or other specialized weaponry to groups like alqaeda. If there were even a 1% possibility that Iraq would transfer weapons to alqaeda, for use against the US, then that risk would have to be mitigated. if America had not acted, and Iraq had given technology to alqaeda (they did have a terrorist training camp at salman pak (near baghdad) complete with a 727 fuselage, used in terrorist training)) then no one would have forgiven the US administration, and would have claimed that Bush hadnt done enough to protect them. bush went on the offensive, and erred on the side of caution. at the time, everyone from the russians, to the french, to the Egyptians said that iraq had WMD and a desire to give it to groups to use it against the US and its allies and interests in the world.

it made sense, hindsight is 20/20, especially when you dont understand geo-politics, and the need to defend your country in a time of war.

2006-11-26 15:54:10 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Although Iraq was not directly involved in the 9/11 plot, that event convinced Bush that having WMD in the hands of an unstable dictator posed an unacceptable threat. Iraq had WMD (it used them), and was required by buth the cease-fire agreement in 1991 and by subsequent UN resolutions to get rid of them in an accounable manner. It did not do so. It follows that the Iraq invasion was justified and appropriate. We have given them the possibility of having a free and democratic regime, but there are obviously a lot of people around who do not want that. As for the WMD, see the reference.

2006-11-27 14:36:18 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

because for no apparent reason you picked one of the UN resolutions and decided to enforce it even though there wasn't a UN mandate calling ofr armed intervention
it must be remembered that not only did Saddam oppose Iran it also hung any Islamic terrorist it could lay its hands on, not because Saddam was a good guy, but because they were more of threat to him than to the USA


Prior to the invasion, the United States' official position was that Iraq was in violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1441 regarding weapons of mass destruction and had to be disarmed by force.[8] The United Kingdom and United States attempted to get a U.N. Security Council resolution authorizing military force, but withdrew it before it could come to a vote after France, Russia, and later China all signaled that they would use their Security Council veto power against any resolution that would include an ultimatum allowing the use of force against Iraq.[9][10] On March 20, 2003, the invasion of Iraq began. This was claimed by some to be a violation of international law, breaking the UN Charter (see Legitimacy of the 2003 invasion of Iraq).[11]

The Iraqi military was defeated, and Baghdad fell on April 9, 2003. On May 1, 2003, U.S. President Bush declared the end of major combat operations, terminating the Baath Party's rule and removing Iraqi President Saddam Hussein from office. Coalition forces ultimately captured Saddam Hussein on December 13, 2003.


Saddam was anti Islamic terrorist it is the USA that allowed them into Iraq

2006-11-26 23:44:18 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Its all about war, oil and destroying America.

look up and read about the PNAC (Project for the New American Century)
It describes how America needs a New Pearl Harbor like event.

Please go to the website listed below and read on....

2006-11-27 00:04:42 · answer #4 · answered by Jimmy1575 2 · 0 0

To establish a democracy or democracies in the Middle East which will stem the growth of terrorism in the world eventually, and to put our eyes and ears there about weapons of mass destruction and terrorist intent until we have adequate remote surveillance equipment where our presence is no longer needed there.

2006-11-26 23:49:13 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Dictatorships and failed states are what's to blame for 9-11. Iraq is the first step toward reshaping that area of the world, which will discredit and stop the global terrorism. Surely, you're smart enough to know that.

2006-11-26 23:47:03 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

Thats a great question, I think alot of people forget who really attacked us, and Iraq had nothing at all to do with it. It makes us look really dumb to the rest of the world.

2006-11-26 23:48:14 · answer #7 · answered by Robin W 4 · 1 0

we blamed terrorists, they just so happened to be in afghanistan. now the problem is in iraq, and its not like we left afghanistan, you just dont hear much about it. kinda like korea

2006-11-26 23:50:13 · answer #8 · answered by juckstapose4lyfe 1 · 0 0

Because Bush Jr is an idiot. There was a very good reason his dad left Saddam on power. Father knows best!

2006-11-27 00:41:53 · answer #9 · answered by rmrndrs 4 · 0 1

Because the largest oil mining industry is in IRAQ and not in Afghanistan.... get my point???

2006-11-26 23:43:55 · answer #10 · answered by bugi 6 · 3 2

fedest.com, questions and answers