The US Military?

Question

Before I ask my question, please dont get my question wrong, it is well meant.

A question please.....WMD did not exist, saddam was a monster, i agree, oil comes into the mix obviously

Bush did what he did for his own agenda

Saddam was responsible for wicked things, the world knows that

But does the " winner " have no responsibilty........300,000 people died

most of them just people like you and i.....and 3,000 good american kids

How do the american voters feel about that please?

By the way i am in canada

Answer 1

WMD did not exist
The WMD's did exist. He had used chemical weapons agains the Kurds and Iranians. The problem is Saddam for reasons we will never know played a cat and mouse game with the weapons inspectors. He gave the appearance that he was hiding them and Bush and Blair (rightly or wrongly, you decide) did not want to play the game any more and decided to remove all doubt by removing Saddam.



Bush did what he did for his own agenda

My opinion is Bush wanted to transform the middle-east by ridding it of dictators and installing democracies.


Does the " winner " have no responsibilty........300,000 people died:

Yes that is why the USA and Britian are still there. To help support the Iraqi governemnt, reestablish law and order.


most of them just people like you and i.....and 3,000 good american kids

How do the american voters feel about that please?

The War has been a politcal football. THe democrats paint a picture of gloom and doom so they can capture the White House in 2008.
Returning US troops paint a different picture of what is going on in Iraq.

Answer 2

First off, WMD's WERE found in Iraq. Most people think that WMD means ONLY nuclear weapons. That is incorrect. WMD's include chemical and biological weapons; and by chemical they do not mean DU; they mean nerve gas, chlorine gas, and the like. Really weapons capable of killing 100s or 1000s of people with a single shell.

We did find 1000s of tons of chemical weapons. We continue to find more stashpiles. See the Washington Post link below.

Second, While I am a conservative, I disagreed with going into Iraq before it happened and still disagree with the decision. That being said, once you break the eggs you have to do something. Either make an omelet or clean up the mess. We've broken the eggs, we cannot just walk away. Only time will tell if we can make an omelet. At this point, no one knows.

Thirdly, I doubt if Bush will be considered the "winner" in this circumstance. In any case, he is not responsible for the 300,000 deaths. Let's face it, Iraq is currently IN a civil war. If anything the presence of the US military is decreasing the number of deaths not increasing them. The people responsible for most of those deaths are the Iraqi (and psuedo-Iraqi) factions in Iraq using violence against each other for their own personal/ political/ religious/whatever reasons.

Back to the WMD's... Here is a quote from the UNSCOM report listed below:
"the Iraqi government has
made many declarations concerning the volume and deposition of
chemical and biological weapons programs -- all of which have been
proven or judged to be inaccurate or incomplete. No admission, for
example, of their extensive biological weapons program was made until
Iraqi defectors forced acknowledgment. Iraq then claimed that all BW
agents and materials had been destroyed -- a claim rejected by both
UNSCOM and Western intelligence agencies. As incomplete as they may
be, Iraq declarations indicate a very extensive CBW program. "

Answer 3

When you find a dozen or so MiG fighters buried in the sand or any kind of munition...... are those not WMDs? The question is what is a WMD. You ever see what a 155mm arty round can do? Probably not. How about when they are linked together? No I don't think so. So, WMDs DO exist. Yes, Saddam was a monster. Oil has nothing to do with it....... If the war was about oil, why are we not trying to take over Saudi Arabia. Or better yet, Canada. I know Canada has oil. I also know Canada would be an easy target if it was all about oil. I know it sucks that people have to die, especially American Soldiers, but that is what we signed up to do. We knew the risks before we put that arm in the air to swear in. On a final note, why does everyone blame Bush? He is just a figurehead. Do you know how many people he has to go through just to get something done? We have democracy, not a dictatorship.....

Answer 4

I was part of the invading force that took Iraq. There probably wasn't any WMDs, Bush did and does have his own agenda.

Saddam was a monster, but it should have been handled diplomatically. Good things are happening over there that we don't hear about because of the media blitz anytime anything bad happens.

Either way, it's a sorry situation made by a bunch of sorry excuses for politicians. They were entrusted to act on behalf of we Americans, and chose to follow their own agendas and interests. No wonder all the rebuilding contracts are going to Haliburton and whoever is in good favor.

Answer 5

please everyone read this its true stuff. (i no i have connections in thegoverment, iraq, military, plus more dont beleive me well ur stupid)

ok since ur candian i hope u understand this better than some of my fellow Americans that dont get the whole picture. before we went to Iraq we had other countries like Russia and other allies saying Saddam had evil intentions against the us and that he may or may not have wmds. when we the us found out we looked into his history and realized that in the 1st gulf war we told him to get rid of the weapons and prove he got rid of all of them. unfortuantely he never gave us full proof of gettin rid of all the weapons. so lets say he had 5 wmds (this is hypethetical) he destroyed 1 and got ridd of 2 well then whr are the other 2? thats y the goverment freked out since we never got ful proof of him geting rid of the weapons. now also oil comes into play since we Americans aren't allowed to drill in are oill feilds since aq bunch of panzee enviormentalists say we can't itll hurt the ecosystem. well if we did drill their our gas prices would go down like a whole freken dollar.
so we invaded irak and kicked some @$$!! but the media has been screwing up whats going on their. theyre doing this since they want to sell their storys and guess wat? bad news sells better than good news. so they report everything thats bad and nt the stuff about us helping people. plus there hasn't been a major fire fight in Iraq since 2003 or 2004 ( i forget) in the Battle of Fallujah. plus we haven't lost a battle in iraq at all. so now all the people our coming from other counries just because they hate our guts. they have no reason to hate us they just do. all they can do now really is blowup cars infact ww2 was worse than this in its first couple battles. so now that the media is making everything look bad the Americans that dont know the whole story arre belly ackchein.

then the bad part is bush isnt letting the military do its job. we have to fill out a paper for every bullet we shoot. plus we have too many troops. so yes i support the war but not the tactics

Answer 6

The only really so-called mass weapons Iraq had were the chemical ones. There were no nuclear bombs found nor proven that Iraq had them.

Bush's own agenda? Unfortunately, he was misled by faulty intelligence, and I feel he did act a little too hastily. But even if Bush hesitated with talks and summit meetings, eventually his nature would've lead America into Iraq--just at a later date. My opinion.

Winner and responsibility--better believe it. Just on the humanitarian basis America needs to support and undo what war had wrathed.

Answer 7

It's sad how people base their opinions without much knowledge.
A well-known major news reporter on an overseas first class flight was asked why the whole truth isn't reported on his and other news channels. It took him the rest of the flight but finally at the baggage claim he replied, "Because the people don't know any better."

Answer 8

So with all your items in your question, why start off with "The US Military?". The military is designed by our constitution to be a "tool" or instrument of national policy. It does not create policy, it does not dictate policy. It enforces policy as created by the civilian leaders in our government. Therefore, even though you had an outstanding question, the premise, as I see it, is wrong. It appears you are discrediting the military, when you should be questioning the government. Even from Canada....

Answer 9

I disagree on your opinion that the President has his own agenda. You are dead wrong on that one. I sleep well at night. The insurgents are doing all the mass murder and the US military is trying to stop it. This mass killing is now at the foot of the Iraqi's and they need to make a decision. Do they want to be part of this century or not?

Answer 10

The American psyche is such that the masses feel excluded from accountability....they set it up that way! Too many retards in the nation!