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

13 answers

Unless you do not want to go back ten years to the former Bush administration, which is to say that Bush jr. is fighting daddy's war which had already ended, or sight "weapons of mass destruction" which were never found, its about (drum roll please).....Oil

2006-12-13 05:42:11 · answer #1 · answered by jerome2all 6 · 0 1

The official reasons are pretty clear. The repeated violations outlined by the UN security council. He violated 16 of them. The last resolution was 1441 which stated that Saddam was supposed to disarm or face "serious consequences."

There were also alot of other related things such as the Oil For Food scandal. Basically Saddam was buying weapons with the money allotted for food for his people. He also did things such as kick out inspectors. Wouldn't allow certain spots to be inspected as outlined. He was giving every indication that he was hiding something.

Congress and the Senate agreed that Bush could use force to get Saddam to comply making the official law on Oct. 16, 2002. On May 1, 2003 we went in...

My info was taken from the White House website and Wikipedia Online Encyclopedia. Just the facts...

2006-12-13 13:58:14 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 1 0

Trini in need is in need of some knowledge...

the reasons were because intelligence at the time even the intelligence that the Clinton administration handed down to Bush suggested that Saddam had WMD's and they were allied with Al Qaeda...Bush also made numerous speeches suggesting that if countries were out there helping out terrorists that they wouldn't be safe...Saddam was known to give out 25,000 USD to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers who attacked Israelis (the country whose leaders attacked and destroyed Iraq's nuclear facility in 1981)
on a side note...when Saddam would give HAMAS the 25,000 USD to pay out to the families HAMAS would keep most of it and only give the families around 5,000 USD (which is still a lot of money over there)

2006-12-13 13:41:28 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

The resolution cited many factors to justify action:

Iraq's noncompliance with the conditions of the 1991 cease fire, including interference with weapons inspectors

Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction, and programs to develop such weapons, posed a "threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region"

Iraq's "brutal repression of its civilian population"

Iraq's "capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people"

Iraq's hostility towards the United States as demonstrated by the 1993 assassination attempt of former President George H. W. Bush, and firing on coalition aircraft enforcing the no-fly zones following the 1991 Gulf War

Members of al-Qaida were "known to be in Iraq"

Iraq's "continu[ing] to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations," including anti-United States terrorist organizations

Fear that Iraq would provide weapons of mass destruction to terrorists for use against the United States

The efforts by the Congress and the President to fight the 9/11 terrorists and those who aided or harbored them

The authorization by the Constitution and the Congress for the President to fight anti-United States terrorism

2006-12-13 13:29:27 · answer #4 · answered by C = JD 5 · 1 0

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021002-2.html

those are the reason(S) we went to Iraq.

Notice there are MANY reasons, and not just one. Liberals try to ignore most of those reasons, and concentrate on the one or two they THINK they can use as ammo.


---

Dated Oct. 2002,

(so they didn't "keep changing", like some liberals who are not informed on the subject will tell you)

2006-12-13 13:29:24 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

I'd stick with the initial reasoning, WMD's and maybe delve into the other reasons given after the WMD's were non-existent.

2006-12-13 13:29:28 · answer #6 · answered by basbalfrk2000 1 · 0 0

My Source was the News and Papers and such which says that they were going in because of Weapons of Mass Destruction which was Bull**** It was because of Oil and the main #1 reason was because when Bush's Father went in he was ran up out of there so to give his father back face he went in to show Saddam that he can't make his father look bad and get away with it.

2006-12-13 13:30:13 · answer #7 · answered by Trini in need 1 · 0 4

Trini, now come on, you really believe what you said. That answer is like pulling a straw from a hat.

2006-12-13 13:36:39 · answer #8 · answered by freelancer262000 1 · 0 0

Good luck finding the "official reasons" because those reasons changed every few months or so (and ultimately, almost all of them were proven to be unsubstantiated.)

2006-12-13 13:25:27 · answer #9 · answered by Dave of the Hill People 4 · 0 2

Weapons of Mass Destruction. This means biological, chemical and/or nuclear agents.

Did you know that they actually did find some chemical weapons, but they flew them out secretly?.. betcha didnt

2006-12-13 13:24:55 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers