The connection was weapons of mass destruction. None found bunch of bullsheeat.
2007-01-14 19:26:24
·
answer #1
·
answered by Y 2
·
0⤊
2⤋
Actually there were WMD's found.That is a published fact,do a search.At any rate Iraq's total stockpile of Anthrax for instance would fit in 14 full size suitcases.14 suitcases,hidden in an area the size of California.If I put a million dollars in 14 suitcases,and hid them in the Californian desert,could you find them? The war is stupid,and it should never have happened.However,to use arguments against the war that have no validity hurts the movement to get us out of there,and Mr. Bush out of office.Educate yourself. Now to the question,there is no Iraq,al Qaeda connection,and there never was one.Even the Bush Administration has backed away from that claim.In a speech at Cleveland Ohio Bush made the following statement: "I don't think we ever said -- at least I know I didn't say that there was a direct connection between September the 11th and Saddam Hussein." Actually he is lying,people in his administration were saying just that,and so was he.Check out the link to see him crawfish,it would be funny if it wasnt tragic.
2007-01-14 19:44:55
·
answer #2
·
answered by Aaron L 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
There was none, other than that 9/11 provided Bush with an excuse to invade Iraq, which he'd been wanting to do from the get go.
2007-01-14 19:29:07
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
There were many gov insiders and policy makers who have been wanting to get rid of Saddam since 1991 Iraq War. Many considered it a mistake to not go into Bagdad in 91. So there were many so called these neo-conservatives like Paul Wolfwitz and others who really wanted to take military actions toward Iraq. There were also Iraqis like Ahmed Chalabi who wanted to over throw Saddam and sought US help for many years and actually provided intelligence to the US well before 911. Clinton administration regarded lot of Iraqi intelligence to be weak and possibly fabricated may be. And they didn't think Iraqi invasion wasn't politically feasible. And this is all before 911.
So you see there were lot going on to remove Saddam even before 911, but after 911 things began to fall into places. With powerful vice president getting solid grip on the US intelligence agency to produce WMD evidence and by using 911 to boost public support for the new Iraq War.
Two key things are the intelligence provided by people like Chalabi who have even lobbyied US congress for Iraq attack for many years(after 91) and our vice president's effort with WMD intelligence. 911 really helped the Bush administration gain public support for the war. By telling people 'if we don't go to Iraq we could see another bigger 911.'
There were no direct links between 911 and Iraq. Many who argued for it probably knew it too. But 911 provided window of opportunity for those who long wanted to take military action to take Saddam out and 'finish the job' that was not finished in 1991. The opportunity was too good to pass up for people like Wolfwitz, Rumsfeld, Cheney and other neo-cons.
Look up Ahmed Chalabi, Iraq, or may be Iraq-US relations at Wikipedia. And 9-11 too. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/truth/
2007-01-14 21:32:52
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
The connection has been weaved neatly by the CIA. 9/11 was a handywork of Osama Bin Laden and his Jihad freedom fighters. The CIA believes that Iraq is coddling these 'resistance' fighters and helping them sneak into U.S. biological weapons of mass destruction manufactured by Saddam's scientists so Iraq was invaded to preempt Laden and cripple Saddam's operation.
2007-01-14 19:58:14
·
answer #5
·
answered by Willie Boy 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
OK, it's late/early & I know better than to waste my time w an answer that isn't even wanted, & wouldn't be understood by the poorly informed.
Asker, do you actually want to understand what's going on, or are you just looking for people to agree w you? I hate this war by the way, & want it ended quickly....does the connection you inquire upon really matter at this point?
Answerers 1,2, & 3 .....your responses just don't line up w the facts. Opinions are fine, but your statements are false!!
Answerer 4 I think you meant to say there...not their, & what analogy are you refering to?? Any connections linking Iraq & 9/11 aren't analogies.....nice try, but you lost me using a word you don't know the definition of.....
Answerer 5 I was with you in the first part of your response, but I'm curious about your reference to "the movement to get Bush out of office" HUH?? What movement?? Like it or not he will be in office until his term is up & the next president we elect takes office in January of 2009....unless you have knowledge of the President resigning or dying before then.......
Answerer 6 What is a so called President? George W Bush IS the President of these United States whether you like him, voted for him (if you even voted) or want to be Pres yourself because you could do a much better job. (see previous paragraph)
Answerer 7 I try to read up on things, & watch the news, but I missed it when anyone alleged that Saddam was helping to smuggle chemical weapons into our country. He was responsible for using those weapons on his own people, & the world (via the UN) decided to confront him & put trade sanctions in place until he conformed w demands to allow an inspector to make sure he wan't violating International agreements on weapons.
Answerer 8 What is a diversian?? Perhaps you meant diversion, which is one of the benefits provided by this site. Again, try using a word whose definition fits the point you are trying to make.
I know it sounds like I'm a cranky know it all who always finds fault......actually you are only partly mistaken. I rarely find fault in others......I have my hands full w my own faults!! Cranky? , yeah a little when people rag on my country without regard for facts or having possession of any productive dialog, & know it all?, not by a long shot......but I do have the courage to admit when I am wrong, & the wisdom to not speak when I have nothing but negative, unproductive diatribe (look it up!) to offer.
The best part of all this though, is our constitution allows you the privilege to express your opinion at any time, on anything without fear of a consequence much worse than having to endure MY reaction to YOUR opinion. God Bless America!!
2007-01-14 21:08:30
·
answer #6
·
answered by SantaBud 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Diversian from cowardice of going into Pakistan and dragging Bin Ladin out because of the Nukes.
2007-01-14 20:07:15
·
answer #7
·
answered by robert m 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
i believe that the connection was imposed by the so-called president bush so that he may put a face on whatever person holds U.S accountable for something. WHomever that person is i dont think he knows but he doesnt care its all to save what lame *** persona he has left.
2007-01-14 19:47:35
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Bush's answer to that question tonight on cbs said their was not the connections that he believed there was when we invaded. He said bad intellegence was the reason but he was the ultimate person to blame for that bad analogy.
2007-01-14 19:30:46
·
answer #9
·
answered by AAed 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
No connection , only fabrication and false accusations.
2007-01-15 02:34:49
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋