Why do so few people know why 9/11 is a valid excuse to invade Iraq?

Question

Think about it if you are capable.

speakeasy, I know the precident, I'm just saying that 9/11 is in fact A valid reason to invade Iraq (among others), and most people think that it is not.

The problem is that when a conservative says, "there is a link between 9/11 and the invasion of Iraq" the liberals hear, "Saddam was in on 9/11." The truth is that the two statements are completely different and unrelated. What liberals fail to understand is that the link is America's tolerance to evil Leaders of Middle Eastern countries that support terrorism. It's just a shame that liberals don't care about 9/11 any more.

Answer 1

9/11 was a valid excuse to invade Iraq. The invasion of Iraq was envisioned as a greater war on terrorism. Iraq had a limited role in assisting the perpetrators of 911 but the purpose of the war was to damage terrorism not just Al Quaida. The Iraq invasion was just a continuation of Desert storm since it had not stopped and Iraq had not obeyed the conditions of the cease fire.

One of the best reasons to invade Iraq was to drive home to the leaders of countries that support terrorism was that if you did support this activity that you would lose your countries.

Thanks to cowardly politicians on both sides of the aisle the opposite is now true.

911 was one of many valid reason to enforce a treaty and continue the war. Please think about that if you are capable.

Answer 2

Yes, the Bush administration did see 9/11 as a valid excuse to invade Iraq which they had planned on invading prior to 9/11 (See the Project for the New American Century at http://www.newamericancentury.org/). They also wanted, probably still at some level want to invade Iraq and North Korea, which they perceive as the "evil axis". I think probably some of the administration now see there are some pitfalls and flaws in their thinking, although some like Cheney and Bush don't like to admit to weakness and mistakes in their thinking.

I think though that there have been 50,000 to 100,000 lives lost and billions of dollars spent so far, with more to come, so not sure if I agree that the ideological reasoning of "spreading democracy" makes it worth it though.

Answer 3

It was a well thought out Ruse. The planning for this attack coincided with the planning for the Patriot Act. Which we all Know was put into effect 10 short days later. What many dont know is went under another name in the mid 90's and was almost unleashed then.
People choose to live in a state of anxiety and fear. People choose to remain blind to the facts, even when they are blantantly shoved in their faces. Most of all, and sadly enough, people choose to let history repeat itself. There cannot be peace without war. Well I believe that we need to start believe in a world without either and take a step back and regain our souls. My opinion is one, but it only takes 1 to make a difference. !1% changes everything. Think about it. We are the ones that have allowed this to happen and we are the ones that can end it, by making a choice not to condone or support that which does not serve our highest good.

Answer 4

Okay genius, why is 9/11 a valid excuse to invade Iraq? I bet you that I can blow your "facts" out of the water. Especially if you cite Faux News.

Considering that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 nor did Saddam support AQ or OBL. No there was no valid reason to invade Iraq.

Answer 5

so few people know that...because most are wise enough to know it was not a good excuse to Invade Iraq.......Looking for EXCUSES are you....that sounds like you are trying to cover up YOUR president's lies.

I see questions like this all the time....absolutely no substance or logic, or critical thinking behind a statement that really can't stand on its own....this is like O'Reilly taking a position and battering his guest with it as if it means something while the guest actually has a structured logical opinion

Answer 6

9/11 was not the excuse to invade Iraq. Saddam's invasion of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, then Clinton's Iraq Liberation act were the precedents.

In 1998, President Clinton made it official US policy to remove Saddam by force because Saddam refused to abide by the cease-fire conditions. Clinton got Congressional approval, bombed Iraq for days, failed miserably.

In 2000, Al Gore and GW Bush both campaigned on the promise to finish the job in Iraq. Joe Lieberman later explained that Gore was simply going to send in the tanks without even talking to the UN about it. The authority already existed.

Answer 7

9/11 is not the reason the Bush/PNAC agenda took shape, it is the
excuse for implementing it.

9/11 gave these men everything they could possibly ask for including unlimited power to implement their otherwise unacceptable plans for global domination. Nothing else would have enabled them to go ahead with their plans. 9/11 was the greatest thing that ever happened to these men. If that does not make you suspicious, nothing will. What are the odds that all of this is nothing more than a historical coincidence?

Answer 8

Bullshite. There is no evidence what-so-ever to indicate that Iraq was complicit in the the 9/11 atrocity. The "Disney" style evidence you have found is seriously flawed.

Answer 9

Because most people can't even tell you who the vice president is...or who the secretary of state is...or what the role of congress is...or what the constitution actually says.

But, they can tell you EXACTLY what happened on American Idol last night, what kind of dress Jodie Foster wore to the Oscars, and who has been dating Jessica Simpson.
Hey, you gotta have priorities!

Answer 10

Because they don't beleive whatever BS you have in mind.

Interesting that you used the word "excuse" rather than "reason"

Isn't an excuse something you make up to get out of trouble?