they have never read the "Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq" from Oct. 2002?
If you need some help counting them, check some of the answers out at this question posted earlier:
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20061213102025AAtC8tF&r=w#NbUvWzS8UDUDlxhJv65V
(and before someone accuses me of calling all liberals ignorant please reread the questions. If I were to say, "how many red squares are on a checkerboard?", you wouldn't assume I meant all the squares on a checkerboard were red, would you?
2006-12-13
05:36:22
·
21 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Military
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021002-2.html
For those ignorant liberals who would like to read it. After you do, you are not allowed to say the war was ONLY about WMD.
2006-12-13
05:37:14 ·
update #1
some polisci.... I would kindly ask you to not use racial slurs in my thread
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AshC4UwiiUcgKQ4oQJAVqF3sy6IX?qid=20061210183527AAKcYe2
2006-12-13
05:43:40 ·
update #2
4500 schools rebuilt or remodeled
8 million new text books distributed
3 elections
17 UN Resolutions over 12 years.
We have now been in Iraq longer than WWII, 400,000 US citizens died during WWII, while just under 3,000 US soldiers have died in Iraq.
Al Qaeda was in the United States, but apperently no Al Qaeda in Iraq?
Saddam Hussein gave $20,000 to each family of Palestinian suicide bombers (funding terrorism).
Abu Nidal the terrorist mastermind of the Achille Lauro where an Elderley wheelchair bound man (Leon Klinghoffer) was shot in the head and thrown overboard was resideing in Iraq as a special guest of Saddam Hussein.
If there was no WMD, then how come Clinton in 1998 wanted to go to war with Iraq over WMD? What did Clinton know? (The exact link to transcript from CNN, posted below)
And finally, for those who doubt, look up the Anfal campaign.
If there was no WMD, then what happened in Hallabjah?
2006-12-13 05:54:26
·
answer #1
·
answered by ? 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
If you knew why the war was started why did you even bother to ask.
Of course the war wasn't just about those invisible WMD's. If you really want to have a ideal. Look up and see how long we have been over in the middle east or have had involvement over there. Its been long before Desert Storm, all the way back to the cold war. The reason we have been over there was to protect our interest and allies. It doesn't take much to realize from that what is so interesting about the middle east. It defiantly aint those beaches over there.
2006-12-13 06:22:10
·
answer #2
·
answered by striderknight2000 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
this war was sold to Congress and to the citizens of this country as the war on terror. How is a Congressman supposed to vote against that when their primary goal in live is getting re-elected.
If this war was the right thing to do, why is it that Bush was not able to put together a "real" coalition? Bush Sr. put together a real coalition. During the first gulf war, less than one third of the troops there were Americans. The total cost of that war to America was less than 10 billion. Were is the support from around the world if this was the right war?
2006-12-13 06:34:28
·
answer #3
·
answered by truth seeker 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
If you read that resolution there are many themes that are present. Those themes can be summed up as WMDs, links to terrorism, threat to the US and hostility toward the UN. The first three turned out to be false. There are some others, but they aren't the important ones.
Then, there has been many reasons brought up since this resolution. For instance, does the resolution go into spreading democracy in the middle east?
So yes, there has been inconsistencies from the president as far as why we went to war. And there was false reasons given for why we went to war.
2006-12-13 05:43:14
·
answer #4
·
answered by Take it from Toby 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
to assert Iraq war is for oil is in simple terms incorrect. because of the fact its greater desirable than in simple terms oil, do they opt for the oil of direction yet they opt for to regulate the midsection East. Its additionally the militia commercial complicated wherein Dwight Eisenhower warned us approximately. Its approximately war profiteering, and to regulate the midsection East and likewise of direction Oil. additionally Israel lobby needs us to pre-emptively invade all Arab international locations. we ought to continuously be responsive to the Synagogue of devil wherein Billy Graham warned us approximately. Bush is a puppet like Obama hes purely a face. actual administration are contained in the arms of the globalists. Our troops are struggling with for the globalists no longer the yank human beings.
2016-10-05 06:38:48
·
answer #5
·
answered by marceau 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
its been official US policy for regime change in iraq, approved by congress in 1998, the 2002 was a follow on, as it was a follow on to numerous UN resolutions, which were never acted upon by the world community.
2006-12-13 05:51:01
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
The worst thing about American Politics are that there are too many Democrats and too many Republicans and not enough Americans. The problem with America today is that there are too many liberals, too many conservatives and not enough people with common wisdom.
2006-12-13 10:04:13
·
answer #7
·
answered by verduneuro 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
probably about as many ignorant Conservatives are informed about
the truth and facts of the 9-11 attacks.(and before someone accuses me of calling all conservatives ignorant,why not start a new political party?lets call it the social,liberal,conservative,peoples party of america,or just the
S.L.C.P.P.ofA. for short! have a nice life.
2006-12-13 06:32:02
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Wow loaded question. I would say 100% of all ignorant liberals think they are informed about the war in Iraq :)
Unless some of them realize they're ignorant, but then they wouldn't be ignorant then, would they?
2006-12-13 05:39:20
·
answer #9
·
answered by JSpielfogel 3
·
5⤊
1⤋
I guess I am an ignorant liberal. I didn't realize the republicans were better informed.
2006-12-13 05:51:33
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋