If Lusitania was used for WW1, and Pearl Harbor for WW2, was 9/ll used to attack Iraq?

Question

Provocation?

Answer 1

9/11 was used to attack Afghanistan. Iraq was attacked because the President and the Us Senate, along with the UN, all agreed Saddam had to be disarmed of the arsenals of WMDs he claimed to have.

Answer 2

Lusitania was not used in the first World War, it would be hard not to declare war after you were attacked at Pearl Harbor, and 9/11 was not used to attack Iraq. I don't know where you got the idea that the sinking of the Lusitania caused our entry into world war one, the sinking of the Lusitania happened almost two years before our entry. Our entry into the First World War was caused by Germany's unrestricted Submarine warfare, and various other economic reasons.

Answer 3

Well, a flaw in your question is that Lusitania was sunk long before the US actually entered WW1 (it sank in 1915 and the US didn't enter the war for another year). It did provoke president Wilson to chastise Germany severely and as a result of that, Germany backed away from its policy of unrestricted submarine warfare for about a year. It was when the Germans returned to their policy of unrestricted submarine warfare in early 1916 that the US started getting really grumpy. Then the LICONIA was sunk and the Zimmerman telegram was revealed and the US decided to enter the war after all.

That being said, yes, of course 9/11 contributed to the decision to go to war with Iraq - remember how scared and vulnerable everyone was feeling. The idea of one less unstable regime with an unpredictable, vicious dictator just seemed like a good idea at the time. In my opinion, it still is a good idea but I know I'm in the minority here.

Answer 4

Absolutely. If you watch the documentary 'Loose Change' or '911 Mysteries' or Alex Jones '911 Road to Tyranny' you can see that those 3 towers were taken down by a controlled demolition. You can see the explosions plain as day and people on the scene all witnessed them. They cover it all up because they control the media. So absolutely 9/11 was used for this. But it was also used to take away our freedoms via the Patriot Act and many other regulations that keep passing through. Pretty soon it will be Nazi Germany all over again. Its not far from that now.

Answer 5

Lusitania Sneak attack, Pearl Harbor Sneak Attack, WTC Sneak Attack but we invaded Afgahnistan a few months later not Iraq........

Answer 6

None of those things were "used" as some failed-in-life polysci professor would have you think. They were legitimate proximate causes. In the case of 9/11, the attack made clear the dangers of leaving a terror master in place with unlimited resources. There were many countries that we could have legitmately engaged (in the sense that they are terrorists), but only Iraq had been in an ongoing war with us and violated the cease fire agreements. Only Iraq among them plotted to kill a U.S. president and demonstrably paid terrorists in Palestine, and used WMD against his people. Only Iraq at that time tried to impress his arab breathren by pretending his WMD stock was more extensive than it was and by refusing to allow inspectors to do their jobs for so long, creating the impression, right or wrong, that he was in the process of hiding his weapons. He may in fact have hid them in Syria but due to interference of U.S. liberals and foreign countries with close economic ties and illegal activities they feared exposed, Saddam had plenty of time to get rid of any solid evidence.

The current president has prevented another attack on our soil for more than five years. There is nothing illusory about the war in Iraq.

Answer 7

Bush never said Saddam had any direct links to 9/11. The only people who say Bush used 9/11 as a reason for removing Saddam are liberals who hate Bush and are willing to make up any lie they can think of to demonize Bush. Remember Dan Rather?
Bill Clinton instituted a policy that called for the removal of Saddam from power in Iraq. Bush has done what Clinton said should be done and liberals hate Bush for it. How silly of them...

Answer 8

Jesus H. Jumpin' Christ on a crutch....do people not read the newspapers or watch TV news these days, or do they get all their information from conspiracy theory web sites?

NO NO NO NO NO, the 9/11 attacks were NOT used as an "excuse" to attack Iran. We sent troops to Iraq to kick Saddam Hussein out of power because he was thought to be in possession of WMDs, which are Weapons of Mass Destruction. While it's true that no nuclear weapons or components were found, our troops did find 600 TONS of chemical munitions all ready to go....chemical munitions which are classifed, by the way, as "weapons of mass destruction." So the MWDs WERE there.

We sent troops to kick the Taliban out of Afghanistan and to find Osama bin Laden as a result of the 9/11 attacks.

Turn the computer off and go buy a newspaper, willya please?

Answer 9

Huh? The Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor! Are you saying we shouldn't have fought back? Not going after people who attack us is one reason why Muslim extremists think we are soft and easy to attack.

Answer 10

Yes.

Bush had planned to invade Iraq even before he was elected.

9/11 was just a convenient way for him to play on people's fear to get support for his war.