Why are we in Iraq?

Answer 1

$

Answer 2

I'm amazed at the number of people that say oil. IT IS NOT OIL! We have more than enough oil for our needs in our own land in Alaska:

http://www.reformation.org/energy-non-crisis.html

Since the 70s ALL oil bought and sold in the entire world has been denominated in US dollars. This means that every country in the entire world had to have a reserve of US dollars if they were going to buy oil, which ensured the solvency of our currency. Saddam began saying that he was going to stop selling his oil in dollars and instead use the euro. This would be very bad news for the US, so in we went! Now we have a permanent presence in the middle east, we'll show them what currency they'll be using!

http://wingtv.net/dollariraq.html

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul303.html

Answer 3

To answer that question, simply Google PNAC.

You will get the link to the official PNAC website and plenty of links to both liberal and conservative viewpoints.

Also be sure to check out the Wikipedia entry.

Answer 4

Let’s face it. Saddam Hussein is a threat to the United States, its allies, the United Nations, and the rest of the world. If the U.N. and the United States do not deal with the threat from this international outlaw and his regime, they will set themselves up for catastrophic consequences.
Critics, including allies of the United States, have questioned whether pre-emptive military action against Iraq is legal under international law. When asked about the criticism, Vice President Dick Cheney said in the case against Iraq, such military action is justified.

“If we have reason to believe someone is preparing an attack against the U.S., has developed that capability, harbors those aspirations, then I think the U.S. is justified in dealing with that, if necessary, by military force,” stated Cheney.

The Bush administration also believes a pre-emptive attack against Iraq is justified based on Saddam’s defiance of every U.N. resolution since the end of the Gulf War.

“A lot of people understand that this man has defied every U.N. resolution. Sixteen U.N. resolutions he’s ignored,” President Bush said. “This man is a man who said he was going to get rid of weapons of mass destruction and for eleven long years he has not fulfilled his promise.”

In 1991 Saddam agreed to cease developing and destroy all weapons of mass destruction. However, in 1998, the International Atomic Energy Association, a subdivision of the U.N., stated Iraq was six months away from developing a nuclear weapon.

In addition, the International Institute of Strategic Studies says there is no question that Saddam’s priority was developing weapons of mass destruction. He is aggressively seeking nuclear weapons and the U.S. may well become the target of an attack. The IISS also stated that Iraq still has sizeable stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and could quickly expand their production.

Recent news has surfaced that Saddam has sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa, recalled nuclear program specialists, drawn up military plans for use of chemical and biological weapons, and illegally retained Scud missiles capable of carrying biological and chemical warheads with a range of 400 miles.

Saddam has further violated the will of the U.N. by refusing to allow weapons inspectors unfettered access to verify the destruction of weapons of mass destruction. He has broken U.N. resolutions that demand he cease repression of his own people, renounce all involvement with terrorism, free more than 600 prisoners taken during the gulf war, and stop development of weapons of mass destruction.

Clearly now is the time to act on Iraq. After eleven long years of deceiving the U.N., the Saddam Hussein regime must be taken out. “As a matter of common sense and self-defense, America will act against such emerging threats before they are fully formed,” says Bush. “The history, the logic, and the facts lead to one conclusion: the Saddam Hussein regime is a grave and gathering threat.”

Answer 5

theres more than one reason ... the big ones are economic- competeing financial systems and defence contractors generate huge revenues ... oil- make no mistake about it ... pipelines are being laid from georgia to afganistan and through the balkans and theyre looking at iran .... and military- china is a MAJOR threat although its not talked about .. the US is positioning itself strategically to confront the growing china threat in the coming years ... and it has nothing to do with terrorism whatsoever .. period.

Answer 6

It obviously wasn't for oil, since our prices are at $2.50 a gallon. (Supply and demand says greater supply = lower prices).

In all actuality, Saudi Arabia holds about 25% of all the world's oil reserves...if we really went to war for oil, why didn't we attack Saudi Arabia?

Answer 7

Oil..... just think about it... OIL!!! how many Iraqui people and Americans are being killed because of that!!! Sir I hate Bush has to put in his head that each country have its own land and land feature, what a jealousick! only because half of America sucks it doesn't mean steal others life!!!

Answer 8

We are attempting to establish a Democratic-Republic, which they obviously don't want. They prefer anarchy. We should have left after we toppled Saddam's regime.

Answer 9

To bring freedom to the Iraqis, and to spread Democracy/future freedom in the Middle East.

Answer 10

Dubya and his gang want $$$$.

Answer 11

to assure american dominance of oil, and make scads of money for Cheney's company, no other reasons