Given the overwhelming evidence, does anyone still believe that invading Iraq was the right thing to do?

Question

Does anyone believe that the U.S. / Nato intelligence machine could be SO wrong about weapons of mass destruction?

Does anyone still believe that Iraq had anything to do with 9/11?

Remember - "Weapons of Mass Destruction and Involvement in 9/11, were the ONLY reasons given that congress had to act upon"

Does anyone think that we have done anything other than further destabilize an already chaotic region of the world?

Answer 1

It was NOT the right thing to do. The Bush administration has admitted that the intelligence was faulty and unclear. It was clear that Osama Bin Laden was most likely in Afghanistan , yet Bush still chose to invade Iraq. Although Saddam Hussein was a terrible person and would have eventually been taken out one way or another, Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 directly. It was just an excuse to let Bush win his little vendetta against Hussein. Saddam is dead now, and it has gained us nothing. There are 3000+ troops and countless Iraqis dead, terrorism has not abated, OBL is still at large, Iraq is mired in civil war and the USA has lost the respect of and is now hated by most of the world.

Answer 2

Given the overwhelming evidence, does anyone still believe that invading Iraq was the right thing to do?
No... If Saddam was such a threat or had the potential to be such a threat, then he should have been dealt with during the Desert Storm Campaign of 1991.

Does anyone believe that the U.S. / Nato intelligence machine could be SO wrong about weapons of mass destruction?
Yes... Think about it, Military Intelligence, what kind of oxymoron is that!

Does anyone still believe that Iraq had anything to do with 9/11?
No... The real people responsible for that act are still at large and likely spread all over the globe.

Does anyone think that we have done anything other than further destabilize an already chaotic region of the world?
No... The people of that region have been at war with one another for centuries and all we have done is to attempt to eradicate a hornets nest by hitting it with a stick. Now of course, all of the hornets are angry and looking for the one who was holding the stick. All we've succeeded in doing is giving all of the believers in Islam a collective reason to hate the US more then they already did.

Answer 3

Just for the record, I'm a Democrat and thought the war was premature. The administration has done a terrible job of explaining its rationale. But yes, this has everything to do with 9/11, and WMD were only a supporting argument for going in, not the only reasons. I also think that not only has the destabilization of Iraq NOT destabilized the region, we're looking at a snapshot of the worst, and it's extremely myopic to think the President's overall strategy isn't both workable and likely beginning to work.
And while I'm on this roll, let me point out that this kind of partisan publication encourages instability more than the fact that our troops are over there, and increases their risks. Read up on 4th generation warfare, and consider the possibility that non-Americans, even our enemies might actually have internet access.

Answer 4

Hi,

My opinion as to the whole affair is as follows.

Absolutely not! I have seen a documentary about the entire saga of events involving the Iraq invasion and i feel that the united states was completely wrong with their course of action. So many innocent people died unnesicarily during the invasion and the long term effects are and will continue to be disastrous. I am not going to comment of the 9/11 invasion because I feel that whoever made the attack was also wrong.

I do not want to be discriminatory towards the people of the united states because I have some very close friends from there, however the decisions made by the United States government have been shocking and totally unnecessary. For the American people to have allowed the actions and having been so easily convinced by such a thin veil over the governments doings is unnerving. I firmly believe that the united states needs to clean up their act and the invasion of Iraq was a stark reminder.

This statement is not aimed at offending anyone and should not be taken so, i would like to make this clear in advance.

I would like to make it clear, once again, that this is an OPINION. I hope it is satisfactory.

Answer 5

I have never thought that we should have invaded Iraq. My son is in the Army Reserves. He spent a year there. It was a terrible time for me wondering if he would be killed. I believe the war is all about oil and control of the country, its government, and the irradication of its people. Our "mission" was to remove Sadaam from power. We did that 2 years ago. Why did we continue to fight these people? This war has nothing to do with 9/11. There is no conclusive proof that Iraq was behind those attacks. Killing thousands of innocent people is a shameful and horrible thing to do, and it is not accomplishing anything. Congress and the White House merely wanted to control the oil and the power that goes with it. We should be pulling our troops out, maybe then the country could heal itself. Imagine if a country sent their troops here. Wouldn't we have vigilantes or groups of people fighting this foreign army? Would we just stand back and allow them to topple our government and take over our country? Of course not! So what makes us think that we have the right to do that to someone else??

Answer 6

Nobody ever did say that Iraq had anything to do with the 9/11

The Weapons of Mass Destruction was only an excuse to go in. Saddam Hussein could have avoided this situation by letting the UN inspectors do their job. Instead... he challenged America
and paid the price.

Destabilising the region is the whole point of the exercise. While the terrorists fight to regain Iraq... they don't have time to plan their attack on the Western World.

I have never seen anyone say...
"Gees... those terrorists made a huge mistake by attacking America on the 9/11"
They lost Afganisthan... Iraq and Saddam as a direct result of it.

Instead... people seem to feel sorry for them.

Answer 7

I never did believe that invading Iraq was the right thing to do. I don't believe that Iraq was involved in the 9/11 attacks. The people of our country were lied to about the reason for going in.
Saddam was a very evil man and if our government were to send troops over there to bring him down so he would stop killing his own people, then perhaps Americans can accept that, but that's not the reason that was given.
My belief is that President Bush was getting back at Saddam because Saddam had threatened in the past to kill the former President Bush.

Answer 8

You sound like someone who is trying to exonerate the liberals who voted for the war in Iraq. It looks like they were duped the same as the president on some of the issues pertaining to Iraq. WMD's not being one of them. i say that because all one need do is follow the MO of the culprit, that being Saddam Hussein.

At the start of the Gulf war, Saddam had Iraqi pilots fly all their airplanes to Iran. He knew the US would destroy his air force if left in Iraq. To this day, I don't believe those aircraft were ever recovered by Iraq. This is the MO I am talking about, because prior to the American invasion in 2003, Saddam had his WMD's flown to Syria. This has been documented and acknowledged by one Iraqi general who had first hand knowledge of this incident. So, to answer your question about US/NATO intelligence, I think they hit it right on the money the first time.

We can run away from a destabilized middle east, but it will not resolve a thing if we did. Frankly, I believe it will exacerbate an already volitile situation. It will give Iran the new found courage to spread it's terrorism to middle eastern states that have yet to be reached. States such as Saudi Arabia, Jordon, Egypt, Kuwait, to name a few.

Iran is the bad boy in all this. Granted there are other sh it disturbers to a lesser degree, Syria for example, has been the force helping Hezbollah and destabilizing Lebanon. Of coarse Syria is nothing more than Iran's surrogate in this whole matter. Syria is Iran's lap dog, snarling and snapping as Iran dictates.

Our troops will be in the middle east for a long, long time. Hopefully, soon they will be mopping up the carnage and devastation we put on Iran, because as long as Iran is left to destabilize the middle east, this thing will continue. The middle east will stabilize even to the point that Israel and the Palestinian authority come to a workable agreement, but first, Syria and Iran need to be neutered.

Perhaps the evidence you refer to is overwhelming in your narrow mind, but to many of us, this thing must be brought to a workable stabilization, and the perps must be eliminated. Only then can we say the job has been completed.

Answer 9

Lots of questions. I never did believe invading Iraq was the "right" thing to do. Should have totally taken over Afghanistan. Everybody in the world understood that 911 had to be avenged, nobody in the world begrudged the U.S. a little payback vis-a-vis the effing Taliban. Would that they were still hiding in their holes in the mountains, while Kabul became a world class - democratic - city. What we're trying to do in Iraq (and failing) would have been possible for Afghanistan. Bush got greedy.

And what Mae said.

Answer 10

Monday night quarterbacking is never the right thing.
Iraq did indeed have wmd's tho not in the amount that
intelligence thought. It's easy to be against something
after it's happened and one can then see it isn't going
well. But, we have to go where we are now, and we're
committed over there right now, and surely cannot wave
the white flag and butt out. Things could still turn around
over there and the good Iraq people will still be thanking
us for coming to their rescue from that barbarian Saddam.
I'm sure Bush would still have been bashed if he had
done nothing after 9/11. He got blamed for Katrina when
he apparently didn't do enough. However, no president has
done any more than send in troops and FEMA to any other
disaster here in the U.S. which is what Bush did. I guess
I don't know what everyone expected him to do with water
over houses, no communications available right away, a
mayor holed up in a dry hotel, a city demolished, and no
where for those who survived to go (except the stadium).
When they could get buses in, they did, but remember
roads were covered with debris and water and were impassable.
Im wondering what you would have done??