2007-01-02 05:45:10 · 13 answers · asked by Cozmik 2 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
Yes he was. The one who planned it remains free.
2007-01-07 15:28:30 · answer #1 · answered by robert m 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think he was the scapegoat for US relations with North Korea, in my opinion. I think 9/11 tied in because it showed the fact the US has glaring weaknesses (just like any other country, really). My theory goes as follows: Pick a country that has a terrible human rights record to justify, and demonstrate that the US can bomb the snot out of somebody if need be. Why? Because North Korea won't be bullied by the US, and they're actually a threat. I believe there was a quote that they would/could turn the US into a "Sea of fire", but I don't have the documentation to show where that quote was and in what context. Bombing them directly would be much harder to justify to the world (as if Iraq wasn't hard enough), not to mention they would bomb right back.
That doesn't mean that Saddam wasn't a horrible, horrible dictator who killed with little discretion when it came to his own interests. If you remember, we originally went in to Iraq because there were reports of weapons of mass destruction - which I never heard conclusive evidence of them being found.
2007-01-02 05:58:53 · answer #2 · answered by country_girl_in_a_city 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, that would have been Osama Bin Laden. Saddam Hussein was standing in the way of Bush's oil. You must understand that Bush Jr. lost a huge sum of money when his oil company went bankrupt in the early 80's. He used Saddam as an excuse to get him out of office so all that oil would belong to him. This is the sick truth of how american government works. Good luck to you if you are running for office. Thank you.
2007-01-02 05:56:55 · answer #3 · answered by cookie 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes he most certainly was a scapegoat for 9/11, also a convenient way to shut him up.
2007-01-02 05:54:24 · answer #4 · answered by boby 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
While there are those that would have you believe otherwise, Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11.
2007-01-02 05:53:08 · answer #5 · answered by dem4six 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
for the millions time saddam had nothing to do with it!!!!!!!!!! and SAddam wasn't buttel dictator he killed all of the tradors and traded him for Bush period. and why did USA took out saddam first ? why didn't they go to north korea ji'll tell you why... Iraq is the heart of the middle east the country that has the most oil and they are scared of the nuclear that Korea has what a bussies ( with a p )lol.
2007-01-02 05:54:10 · answer #6 · answered by AshA 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No. He had nothing to do with 911. He wasn't a scape goat for anything. He was a brutal dictator.
2007-01-02 05:49:43 · answer #7 · answered by Steve T 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I don't think so. If that were to be the case, the action against him would have been years earlier.
2007-01-02 05:52:50 · answer #8 · answered by ericscribener 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
no. the reason why the US went after him was because of oil. it had nothing to do with freedom.
2007-01-02 06:20:52 · answer #9 · answered by happyinblue 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think so because they didn't accused him this case
2007-01-02 06:14:53 · answer #10 · answered by Miracle 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋