Was the invasion of Iraq the best way to fight the war on terror?

Answer 1

Nobody seems to have any better ideas.

The fact of the matter is that capturing Afghanistan merely denied the enemy the bases from which they launched their attacks.

Ending the threat of Islamic Fundamentalist terrorism requires that we change the whole middle east. And Iraq is the fulcrum for doing this.

Hint: look at a map and note Iraq's strategic location in regards to the nations that are major players in international terrorism.

Answer 2

The invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism/Al Queda. Even when touting the reasons for invading Iraq, Bush stuck mainly to WMDs and nuclear proliferation, only coyly alluding to Iraq's possible link to 9/11. He has admitted, more than once, that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, which for some strange reasons his followers like to ignore. I guess it's convenient for some to build up reasons in their mind that don't hold any water so they can justify Bush's folly. It's exceedingly strange though that in order to do so they conveniently ignore his own admission of there being no connection. Hussein kept Al Queda out of Iraq. He refused to let a terrorist cell that he didn't have control of operate in his country. But now? Since Bush invaded Iraq and blew the country wide open Al Queda has poured in and now adds to the problems Bush created that gets our soldiers killed and maimed every day. It's ironic that now he can rightfully claim terrorist cells exist in Iraq yet conveniently ignore how they got there.

Bush relegated the war on Al Queda to second status when he invaded Iraq over his obsession. Now the terror cells related to Al Queda grow more numerous every day, in countries all over the world. The operation in Somalia is an example of what we should have been conducting for the last five years. We still operate in Afghanistan and still chase Al Queda, but if we had put as much force and concentration on going after Al Queda as Bush did in going after Hussein it's likely their influence and effectiveness would be largely reduced today. The invasion of Iraq had as much to do with terrorism as Hollywood does with reality.

Answer 3

Absolutely not. The invasion of Iraq was a war of choice and an enormous distraction from the goal which was to get the people responsible for 9/11. Anyone remember that little event? Oh and by the way, where is Osama bin Laden? You know, the guy Bush wanted to get "dead or alive" until he lost interest in him.

Answer 4

I think anybody who has been paying any kind of attention knows this was the wrong move. And if they don't they need to take those blinders off they say the people who don't support the war are wearing

Answer 5

it was and still is one step in the ways to fight either state sanctioned terrorism,or sideline sanctioning by offering men,materiel and safe haven.

Answer 6

it was a sideline. the iraq deal was after 13 years of flipping off the u.n. and EVERYBODY thought iraq was conciliatory with al-queda. worst case is that we now have a foothold in the region and maybe it will allow our intelligence community to improve their abilities.

Answer 7

When al-Qaeda, who actually attacked our country, was stationed in the high regions of Afghanistan, how do you justify invading and occupying another country that was not related to the original events?

Answer 8

Only for those who believe in the Easter Bunny.

Answer 9

no, iraq had nothing to do with terrorism. we just created more terrorists that want to kill us to get us out of their area. way to go Dubya!

Answer 10

Hell yea! The vast Iraqi army was about to board the huge Iraqi navy and sail umimpeded to the US where they would have invaded unopposed. We stopped them just in time.