Should the US have gotten involved in the war with Iraq?

Question

quotes. reasons why

Answer 1

My husband just recently joined the army June this year. And at first I thought the war was a good idea however now I think we are just there fighting someone elses war. I think we should pull out. I still support Bush but he really needs to let our troops come home. My husband is suppose to deploy come Aug or Sept. God Bless All Our Troops. May They All Come Home Soon And Safely.


And for all those that say this war HAS been pointless. Think about all the people that lost their lives for this cause that people call pointless. Kids that have lost their daddy's and wives that now sleep alone. These are the people that didnt think it was pointless. That gave their life for this country. Some things that were good have came from this war. And people that loss their life to help with it. So next time you think about this war think of the people that are still there and the people that were there and the people that layed their lives there and the people still to go there that are fighting for your pointless lives.

Answer 2

No. None of the attackers on 9-11 were from Iraq. The conservatives wanted a war with Iraq back in the 90s, but admitted then that it's unlikely they could get one going unless an event happened on the level of Pearl Harbor. Well, they got their event, and they took advantage of it.

We should have put _all_ of our resources towards hunting down the criminal groups that were involved in the 9-11 attacks. Iraq was a distraction, and just gave those terrorist groups a recruiting center and a battleground.

For those that claim we were 'already at war' with Iraq, and site things that Iraq supposedly did in the previous decade... well, the fact is that Iraq was not a current threat. Al Qaeda and similar groups were. Iraq was contained. If Iraq had to be dealt with it certainly could have waited. 9-11 was an excuse, and the result has been utter chaos, a huge loss of life, and a greater threat than ever existed before. If we wanted to take down Hussein we should've finished the job in the first Gulf war, rather than abandoning those we encouraged to rise up against him.

Answer 3

No, but they are there and I am going to support them. O.K. here is my reason for saying no. First we have to go to the Constitution of the United States. Article 6, Cla.2 " This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of The United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound therebe, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." That means that any Law made that is repugnant to the Constitution is no Law at all.

O.K. We know the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. Now Let's go a little deeper. Art 1, Sec. 8, Cla. 11, Congress shall have the power "To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;" That means the Congress has the power to declare War, not the President and Congress did not declare War. It gave that power to the President, which it cannot do.

Let's go a little further to the duties of the President. Article 2, Section 2, Clause 1. in part, "The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States;". Article 2, Section 3 in part states, "he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed," Let's back that up with the President's Oath. Article 2, Section 1, Clause 8. "Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:-"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." "

So, the President having taken the Oath knowing that he is supposed to take care that the Laws be faithfully executed knew or should have known that he did not have the power to declare war in Iraq. Congress knew or should have known that it did not have the power to grant the President that kind of power, which leads to one final point.
Last point. Article 2, Section 4 states, "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of , Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

Question. Wouldn't Congress and the President of the United States be guilty of at least a Misdemeanor? Should all of Congress and the President be removed from Office? I am not saying that, The Constitution is however. You can make up your own mind. I simply stated facts. Anyway, the troops are in Iraq and I am going to support them. I just don't support the way they got there. But this is my opinion.

Answer 4

No simply because they have destroyed a country and killed alot of their own men and women not to mention the 100,000 + iraqis.

I dont understand why they put saddam in power in the first place.
I dont understand why they sold him chemical and other weapons.
I dont understand why they sold him targetting maps for iran.
I dont understand why they told him they would not attack if he invaded kuwait.
I dont understand why they left him in power after the first iraq war.
I dont understand why they lied about weapons of mass destruction this time round.
I dont understand why they removed the one person who has and was keeping iraq in line and united as a country.
The US know full well that only a strong man can keep iraq together yet they removed the glue that was saddam and well the result is there for all to see.

Saddam may have been a firm leader but there certainly were no antics like what is going on while he was in power.

Bring him back, the President Saddam Hussien is still the President, the US have NO right attacking and invading Iraq a soverign nation and installing their puppet leaders who have no power.

Saddam is not stupid he knew the americans where comming and he setup the resistnace/insurgency...lets not forget he is a strong beliver in the russian Scorched Earth policy, if you cant retain land, destroy it.

I mean what victory have the US gained by going to Iraq, is it peacful? is it safe? are people living in harmony as they promised?

They have delivered nothing but faliure and are now running as fast as they can to get out of Iraq.

Bring back President Saddam Hussien and let him regain some control, he is the americans last hope, otherwise Iraq is doomed and with that the region and with that the saftey of the US.

Answer 5

Personally, I don't think we should have. If you take a look back at the past then you can see that every civil war that we've ever put our fingers into has ended in the same result. that result being... the one that we didn't want. Vietnam, Germany, Korea, Iraq, all those attempts have been the same. However the questions that I think the government needs to ask themselves is this: What happened in our Civil War? How did we solve it? Who helped us? What were the reprocussions? Did we make it out ok? History teachers all say that if we learn from the past, then we can prevent from making those mistakes in the future. Aparently Congress has never heard that phrase.

Answer 6

No, the U.S. is not the duty of the U.S. to free up countries or depose dictatorships. The pretext under which the U.S. went to war in Iraq was the latter's possession of arms of mass destruction, which turned out later to be a lie. The U.S. has done more damage than good in Iraq, the number of Iraqis killed as a result of this intervention is many folds the numbers ever killed under Saddam's regime. So, in effect the Iraqis would have a valid claim if at a later stage they demanded just "compensation" for the huge damage this country suffered as a result.

Answer 7

Yes, for many reasons that are rarely aired.

1. We were already at war with Iraq. The previous war stood on hold. When Iraq violated the terms of the cease fire, the war continued.
2. Their leader tried to kill our leader. Regardless of how you feel about any particular president, we cannot allow that act of war to go unanswered.
3. Democrats and Republicans both endorsed it at the time based in part on the urging of former President Clinton.
4. Iraq engaged in state-sponsored terrorism, pouring funds out to those who killed children in Israel, our only solid middle east ally. Should we only be fighting flavor of the month terrorists?
5. The enormous reduction in bloodshed of avoided conflicts. Other countries with state sponsored terrorism, right or wrong, decided we were so crazy that they would not go up against us and even cooperated--Libya and Pakistan e.g.

Whether or not the war and its luke-warm war aftermath were conducted properly is entirely another story.

Answer 8

We had to do something. The Al Qaeda people were solidifying and amassing technology and building weapons of mass destruction. North Korea has exploded a nuke now, and Iran is close. We could not sit idly by until they nuked New York and Washington, as they are certain to do if they ever get the means to do so. Whether we attacked Iraq, or Syria, or North Korea, we had to start somewhere to break up that alliance. As Benjamin Netenyahu (sp?) said, to us, "your enemies have the will to destroy you but they do not yet have the means. You, on the other hand, have the means to destroy them, but not the will. But you must find the will. Because otherwise, as soon as they get nuclear weapons, they will destroy you."

So the war in Iraq was as good a starting point as any other - it got the ball rolling towards breaking up that alliance that wants to kill us.

Answer 9

things happen for a reason, maybe it's possibly making Bush realize that the war in Iraq could be pointless, but at the same time there are still issues in Iraq and maybe trying to resolve those issues, which is why he is keeping his troops there.

Answer 10

No.
1. Reasons for going to war were false (no WMD, no connection to al-qaida or 9/11)
2. Iraq destabilized.
3. Iran now convinced it needs a nuclear deterrent
4. Cost to the US in military readiness, tax dollars, soldier lives, and international credibility is astronomical.
5. Tens of thousands of Iraqis killed, with millions more displaced (the friendly word for forced to leave their homes due to its destruction or in fear for their lives).

When we count the deaths due to our invasion, we shouldn't just count American soldiers. Every Iraqi's life counts just as much.