2006-12-27 22:30:55 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Current Events
Because George Bush likes a good war and because there is oil there...
What I would like to see is Bush taking the place of a soldier right there in Iraq - that would be brave!!! But, sending others to do his dirty work... Coward!!!
Besides, Saddam killed many people but how many did Bush sentenced to death while he was governer?
2006-12-27 23:54:23 · answer #1 · answered by Carla 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Here is my understanding as little as it is.
Saddam was a very cruel torturous and greedy man/leader
His people needed to be freed from the terrible man,I'm just sorry it took so long and why didn't other important leaders over there do something about him?
Because of his evil wicked ways it will take a long time for the people and the country to embrace the change and make a better place for themselves.Some of those country men who are supporters of Saddam and his bad ways will just not give up to easily.Others, I think don't like the fact that it took us Westerners to help free them,because apparently we are all suppose to be evil as well.
What I don't understand is why it is taking so long and was it all about money in the end or what?I feel so sorry for the people the way they live in such harsh conditions I'm sure I would not survive.I like my fresh water and electricity a whole lot.They should hurry and get their own country up and running better than it ever has, let the outsiders help them (our armies and helpers)
I hope the women/children and men over there can get happy and some good quality life real soon
Sorry I waffled on a bit
2006-12-28 06:56:49 · answer #2 · answered by deb m 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The war in Iraq would have happened regardless of 9/11. Unfortunately, the US president is a horrible public speaker and the media likes to sensationalize as much as they can. We were thirsting so badly for blood after 9/11 that we were told what we wanted to hear... or we heard what we wanted to hear and now that we are looking back we are saying, "why?"
The truth is that Saddam Hussein has been a thorn in the side of the United States long before George W took office - and that includes when Clinton was in office. He has made numerous threats against the United States and our leaders. He was testing chemical weapons on his own people.
The UN ignored Iraq's blatant disregard for the rules about arms just as they are ignoring what is going on in Iran. They asked over and over to be let into the country to make sure that Iraq was not creating weapoms of mass destruction, but he refused to let them in. When they were finally let in, he refused to let them see certain areas.
Because of his secrecy the NSA became more and more afraid that Iraq was creating weapons with power enough to sufficiently harm our country. The UN kept putting off forcing Hussein to show what was inside key areas, so we lost patience and went in. The war and the overthrowing of the government there was an attempt to free the Iraqi people and have them form a democratic nation in the hopes that the overbearing sunnis and the underrepresented shiites and kurds can find a way to get along and make decisions of their own.
As for the oil, yeah, I have little doubt that it was a big factor as well... Think about it. If you cut off our biggest energy supply, what is going to happen? We are hurting enough as it is by the hike in gas prices. And we are all too stubborn (or can't afford) to use alternate sources of energy. The government can't make it mandatory that we do, because we have a democratic government.
Troops were sent to Afghanistan for 9/11. As for Iraq's role in 9/11, the President specifically stated that all persons involved in terrorism would be found, including those who helped fund it. There is evidence supporting that Hussein helped fund 9/11.
2006-12-28 06:53:51 · answer #3 · answered by slaughter114 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Because, besides being the least intelligent person to occupy the office of the US presidency in my lifetime, "W" Bush is an @sshole. The 9/11 attacks put fear in the hearts of many Americans, rendering them/us even more gullible than they/we normally are. So, when Bush pointed at Hussein, the country was all too ready to follow his wretched @ss and send their sons and daughters off ---to be killed and maimed--- to protect us from the evil-doing (and conveniently brown-skinned) villian.
Anybody ---ANYBODY--- with half a brain and half an awareness of the world beyond the US borders could have seen this catastrophic fiasco coming before it even started. Unfortunately, that requirement is not met by even half my fellow Americans. And this idiot who entered office under the most questionable of circumstances... How the HELL are we letting that little b@stard stay in office?
2006-12-28 06:48:00 · answer #4 · answered by SkyDotCom 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm going to answer you by answering "Deb M". With respect, Deb? If this was about helping a poor, oppressed people from suffering under a horrible, horrible leader (which Hussein was), why has Bush not rushed to help the even more oppressed people of the Sudan, where I think about a quarter million people have died and the government is complicit? I'm not advocating war ANYWHERE. God will soon bring justice to the word. BUT the question was asked about the rationale.
2006-12-28 10:05:08 · answer #5 · answered by Q&A Queen 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
One word - Oil. Iraq had been getting out of hand for ages but 9/11 was a convenient excuse for finsihing what his father started. Not sayign Saddam didn't deserve it buit the whole thing has been a shambles and the country is still no better.
Expect more 'situations' like this as the oil starts running out....
2006-12-28 06:39:38 · answer #6 · answered by gwen 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Good question, I don't understand why we're there either.I do notice that there's plenty of private companies getting contracts and making money(not just american companies). I also notice the lack of any questions regarding Iranian influence amongst the Shia of Iraq. Just like the lack of questions about the Saudi support of the Sunni in Iraq. My point being that there's alot of "cooks in the kitchen" so to speak.
2006-12-28 06:40:20 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's part of the US geo-political strategy in world affairs. Secure world energy source, build allies in stratigic places around the world...etc. Ever since 91 Iraq War. There have been calls to remove Saddam. By the people inside our government and also by Iraqi exiles and intellectuals who lobbied the US congress for years. People like A. Chalabi(Iraq dissident) fed intelligence to US intelligence agencies to support claims of WMD probably even before 911. Their case was quite weak however and Clinton administration thought that it was too. After 911 things just fell into places. Cheney, most powerful vice president ever orchestrated massive effort to push Iraq WMD case through. It was shear bureacratic acrobat that won the case for Iraq WMD and not that it was strong case. And 911 fear was strongly used to gain public support for the war. And we went to Iraq. It wasn't just 911 and Iraq. 911 definitely helped it, but wasn't the sole cause of the war.
2006-12-28 06:41:15 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
1) Petrol (When the US petrol reserve is all used , US has to use Iraqi petrol .
2) Weakening the arab countries by creating chaos , social problems and causing wars and renewed conflicts
2006-12-28 12:04:39 · answer #9 · answered by chad 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because Bush wanted an easy War to win that he could get the country behind. He did this by continously talking about Weapons of Mass Destruction, WMDs. Of course he knew they didn't exist and was lieing to us.
2006-12-28 06:34:44 · answer #10 · answered by Dennis Fargo 5 · 3⤊ 2⤋