When did the story change from WMDs to invade to get rid of Hussein and spread democracy?

Question

Need some help with timelines here.

Answer 1

WE FOUND EVIDENCE OF WMDs!!! I'm not going to waste everybody's time repeating this again, but the mainstream press has effectively buried that story.

Now to the question - If anybody thinks we SOLELY invaded Iraq because of WMD, than you weren't listening. Colin Powell speech to the UN (Nov 02), President Bush state of union (Axis of Evil), MOST of CONGRESS addresses after 9-11, and daily press briefings by State Dept and White House. Ever hear the term "no distinction between terrorists and those that support them?" That means Iraq was about MORE then WMD long before the invasion - and FALSE news claims we didn't find any.


ALERT ALERT ALERT Michele's posting of motherjones lie by lie timeline - THERE ARE NO POSTINGS PRIOR TO BUSH GETTING ELECTED. Even the "bi-patisan" 9-11 commission report includes FAILURES of the CLINTON administration for 9-11 and terrorism gaining in strength worldwide (including Sadaam).

Answer 2

In 2002 the WMD story was not working and the true reason to go in there came out. There has been a change of policy every year and sometimes more in a year veeeerrryyy confusing for the locals. By 2003 in June or so there was mention and finally a review and in 2004 the big paper and the president should have never mentioned it again but on several occasions he would make reference to WMD but, it was a dead issue. It comes up by opponent all the time, but it is history. The history of how a lie can kill. Whoops I did not mean that.

Answer 3

When that mobile WMD Lab turned out to be a Crop Duster service truck.

I guess most of the CIA never spent any time around the Heartland of America. I'm not a farmer but new the instant I saw that thing what it was.

The Crop Duster lands on a dirt road the truck fills it up with seeds or fertilizer etc. tops off the fuel tank and the plane takes off again. I have seen these things many times.

Go big Red Go

Answer 4

Regime change dates way back as part of U.S History and can get its begining even before the Monroe Doctrine, used by President Polk for War with Mexico, Rooseveldt for invasion of Panama Canal. Reason for Spanish American War and take over of Phillipines by US.
In the curent case it was the approved reason even before the invasion by Bush Sr as Bill Clinton signed the IraqKiberation ACT in 1980's.
What is said at tiem was just propaganda to get the policy inot actuality. WMD's just a ploy to spread fear backed an American publics revenge blood thirst to pay of 9/11.
Patriotism led by insinuation Iraq part of 9/11.

Answer 5

Regime change was always the goal in Iraq. Regime change amounts to removing Hussein from power. Now you can argue the justification angle from any position, but it cannot be denied that the first paramount goal was to remove Hussein from power. This goal was never questioned and was never changed. As for timelines consider these 2 passages from Mr. Bush's original speech to the nation on the matter.

"And that's why two administrations -- mine and President Clinton's -- have stated that regime change in Iraq is the only certain means of removing a great danger to our nation."

"America believes that all people are entitled to hope and human rights, to the non-negotiable demands of human dignity. People everywhere prefer freedom to slavery; prosperity to squalor; self-government to the rule of terror and torture. America is a friend to the people of Iraq. Our demands are directed only at the regime that enslaves them and threatens us. When these demands are met, the first and greatest benefit will come to Iraqi men, women and children. The oppression of Kurds, Assyrians, Turkomans, Shi'a, Sunnis and others will be lifted. The long captivity of Iraq will end, and an era of new hope will begin."

The words speak for themselves and directly provide an answer to your question. The answer is removing Saddam and promoting democracy were always goals of the administration.

Answer 6

Mid to late summer of '03 was when the TV started running more on the ideological aspect and less on the hard WMD stuff, probably because they knew they wouldn't find a damn thing.

CVQ: the Congressional authorization for the use of force was approved in light of alleged WMD evidence. Colin Powell went to the UN with a vial of fake anthrax and an outdated student paper to present the case of WMDs to the international community. In the run up to the war, our administration was screaming and hollering about Saddam's WMDs, not the idea that we needed to institute regime change(which, by the way, is NOT a legal reason to invade another country). Get your facts straight, kid.

Answer 7

You forgot that it started with the whole 9-11 link thing. Then went to WMDs, and is now Iraqi freedom/ kill hussein. Keep spouting useless rhetoric and someone will eventually believe it right? That is what propaganda is about. (Oh and the story started to change right before we went over there, you know, when the UN didn't believe us in the first place).

Answer 8

I'm constantly amazed at the left's ability to completely rewrite history. Feel free to check out the state of the union address just prior to the war in Iraq if you want to see how getting rid of Saddam and spreading democracy were ALWAYS objectives for the war.

Answer 9

Why can some people never understand that Saddam Hussein WAS A WMD. He wouldn't blink at killing anyone on yahoo answers. So why everyone sits here and wants to whine about Iraq, just remember all the people he killed (Hussein).

Answer 10

It's very simple really. The United States realized they had been wrong in their pretext for invading Iraq and there NO WMDs. They had to come up with a secondary excuse. Hussein and democracy fit the bill at the time.