1.Sadam failed to abide by the UN resolutions
2.Sadam continually failed to let the UN inspectors in when he finally did,military has tapes of him moving weapons out of Iraq into Syria.
3.He was shooting at our planes in the no fly zone
4.He continually practiced genocide and torture on his own people.
5.President Clinton stated as well in his Public Address that Sadam had WMD's and was a threat to the US,then he attacked Iraq as well.
2007-01-06 07:30:18 · 22 answers · asked by ×ithurtsogoodØ 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
#1 Clinton did not say that, he said it has been presented that he has WMD! Bush did the presenting of evidence!
#2 If all the reasons were based on the UN
why was the UN against the invasion!
Your answers failed the test!
2007-01-06 07:36:03 · answer #1 · answered by Anarchy99 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Leave it. What in the name of all that's holy did Saddam have to do with 9/11? Bush used that as his excuse to go into Iraq if you remember, or is your memory so selective that you can't remember his "awe-inspiring speech" in which he told us that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction - none of which have ever been found - and was part of the Axis of Evil which was responsible for the 9/11 attacks? The person responsible for that was Osama bin Laden who has been hiding out in Afghanistan and Pakistan - not Iraq. Bush didn't like Saddam because he had put a contract out on Daddy at the time of the Gulf War. He used 9/11 as an excuse. Is the world better off without Saddam? Of course. Did he have anything to do with 9/11 and terrorism in this country. Not a damned thing!!!
2007-01-06 07:40:07 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
I would add a 6th reason:
6. Iraq was the only nation that did not condemn the 9/11 attacks.
Do I think Saddam had a hand in it? No, but his refusal to condemn the attacks earned him his own death, on top of the other reasons.
2007-01-06 07:43:19 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Saddam was under control, and inspectors were making much progress for the three or four months immediately before the US invasion. The US was just determined to invade; that's the weight of the evidence. I recommend you do some reading of the other side. Hans Blix, the chief inspector said: "And among the 700 inspections that we performed, none brought us any evidence of weapons of mass destruction."
2007-01-06 07:39:24 · answer #4 · answered by TxSup 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Good presentation... We (anybody with half a brain) will Take it.
We are no longer at war we WON it. We are just trying to get the dumbfounded masses that have been liberated to get organized enough to KEEP their new freedom. The cockroaches that were previously in power are still there, and they are pi$$ed, but we don't line them up and machine gun them all (what they deserve) like their predecessor so they are free to fight on.
2007-01-06 07:56:36 · answer #5 · answered by Gunny T 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Saddam was just obsessed with his own sovereignty. I am glad he has been disposed of, although I must let you know that our president pushed hard for us to enter this war. Remember when our government said Saddam was buying plutonium from Africa, or when they said Saddam and Al-Qaeda were connected? Those statements were NEVER confirmed by Intelligence. Also, why don't we go get those ruthless and genocidal dictators in Iran, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Dubai, Sudan, Somalia, or North Korea??
2007-01-06 07:34:19 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Leave it - bottom line, we had no justification for unilateral invasion. Had UN voted for it maye a different story.
Nice try though, you've got just enough truth in there to fool some of the people. But why haven't we been shown these alleged "military has tapes of him moving weapons..." - if we had them, trust me, we would have seen them!!
2007-01-06 07:39:06 · answer #7 · answered by ash 7 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Liberals do not want to see the truth in ANYTHING. They love their BIG OIL and WMD's more than they love the truth.
They will never understand because either it's a limited mental capacity thing or selective hearing - and neither gets them any further to the truth.
2007-01-06 07:44:54 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Thanks for your opinion, I'LL cherish it always....Now that we all agree that we're there, can someone other than the fools of the past few attempts,come up with a "REAL PLAN" not a new slogan,to get us out,and let these friggin idiots kill each other in the name of religion....Jeeeezzzzz
2007-01-06 07:34:24 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
WRONG.
If its about UN resolutions then why has Israel never been attacked they have broken enough of them. Yeah he practiced genocide but Bush has plenty of blood on his hands.
Stop acting stupid the whole world knows its about OIL and MONEY
2007-01-06 07:41:55 · answer #10 · answered by BRITS OUT 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋