Have we forgot what happened on 9-11-01 and what Saddam really stood for?

Question

Everyone is upset about more troops.It is no secret that Saddams Bath party is a dirrect descendant of Adolph Hitler and thr NATZI party.We were ALL behind getting terrorist' and evil dictators out of power on 9-12-01.If we look at history we have always bailed when things went bad trying to get rid of evil for it to only bite the U.S.A. later.

Answer 1

There are only international rumors that Iraq and Saddam were linked, and even that distantly, to Al-Quaida.
Osama Bin Laden and the terrorists of Al-Quaida are responsible for the terrible events of 9-11-01. They are still out there and both American and Canadian soldiers are still dying while trying to find them in those blasted caves over in Afganistan.
I don't disagree that Saddam had to go, but for a variety of different reasons that have nothing to do with the destruction of the World Trade Centre and the loss of innocent lives that took place that day.
I am Canadian and know all too well what is happening over there as I have a family member serving with the Canadian Military in Afganistan.
Bush has made mistakes, yes, but keep in mind he is a war time president dealing with a terrorist attack on his own soil. War time presidents have never been popular and a president who has a war and terrorists to handle, hasn't got a prayer. I think that he has done the best he can in an impossible situation, and let's face it, for better or worse, he is only human. Name me one human being who has never made a mistake and is over the age of 6 months. We all make them, but yet we expect our political leaders to be perfect, maybe even super human. Give the man a break. He can't run again anyway so why get yourself worked up into a frenzy. Worry about what the next president is going to do instead.
I know, easy for me to say, it isn't my country, but honestly, I'll take your current president over our current prime minister anyday. Anybody want Harper? Really, you can have him.

Answer 2

Attacking Iraq for 9-11 is like attacking Mexico for Pearl Harbor. Whether or not Saddam was a despot and a tyrant I'm not sure it's America's place to be world cop. And if Bush really wants to go after tyranny why did he stand idly by on Darfur? Probably because there's no oil there. And what about China? Well, they do hold an awful lot of our currency. Sorry, I just don't buy the tyrant argument frankly, I find it insincere and hypocritical. Further, since Bush was planning on invading Iraq as far back as his campaign in 1999 I think 9-11 was just a convenient excuse to dupe the American public with tall tales about "al qaida links" and "wmd's" and invade an oil-rich nation to get access to its resources. I don't buy it and I don't like being pandered to.

All I ask is that my president be straight with us. If it's oil we need and we can't have it unless Sadaam is out of the way, just say so. I don't need all this song and dance and all this terror plot hokum, I'm not stupid and neither is the public, just sack up and give it to us straight, put it to the American public like you're supposed to and let us decide. All this other nonsense belittles and divides us all and we deserve better than that.

Look, I lost a childhood friend that day and I'm not going to dishonor his or anyone's memory by blaming the wrong guy. I also served in the military and all I ever asked was to be deployed for a just cause and friends, this just aint it.

Answer 3

Yes, we have.

Bin Ladin is not in Iraq... but we are.

We stirred up the most sensitive region in the world. We removed Saddam and upset the balance of power.

Iraq used to be a check against Iran.

But now that Iraq is gone... Iran can get nukes without fearing that their neighbor (Iraq) will get them as well.

So we have created more terrorists. We have embarassed our contry on the world stage. We have dedicated our troops to nation-building when they should be running after Bin Ladin.

So yes, we have forgotten what happened on 9-11... because idiots think that the best way to win the war on terror is to find a bad guy like Saddam and topple him... rather than going after the real people and structure that attacked us.

And for goodness sakes... once the decision is made to go after Saddam... win, and win quickly! We are not losing in Iraq, but we are not winning. You must hold the chief executive accountable for the failings of his government. We have the most powerful military in the world... the best soldiers in the world... the bravest soldiers in the world... yes all objective signs point to one fact:

Things are not going very well.

Answer 4

Here we go again. Yes Saddam was bad guy. Yes Saddam was a murderer in his own country. Yes Saddam worried some of the other countries (even Arab countries). But no evidence was ever discovered that linked Saddam with the events of 9-11-01. Bush and especially Cheney touted that rhetoric early on in the War on Iraqi. And Cheney still does to this day. Bush has become a littler slicker, he does say there was relationship between the Bath party and Al-Qaida, but he uses Saddam's name and Al-Qaida in the same paragraph when he talks about Al-Qaida as to insinuate a relationship. There are many more terrible dictatorships in the world. And what about the ethnic cleansing going on in the DarFur region of Africa. Hundreds of thousands of people have been killed and millions more displaced. Why is the US Military not heavily involved in quelling that violence? I have not forgotten what happened on 9/11 nor have I forgotten that we had Bin Laden scrambling and in our military's sight before he got away and that Al-Qaida has got even more recruits due the mess in Iraq.

Answer 5

The Islamic radicals have wanted to start their jihad for over 25 years - terrorizing and murdering innocent people all over the globe - declaring war and threatening to topple the United States Government - committing clear acts of war and finally orchestrating the events of 9/11 - well, now they've gotten their wish.
Why some people would shy away from trying to defeat this demented ideology is way beyond anything I can figure out.
We don't need to repeat the inaction and appeasement policies of the past in trying to deal with an ideology that clearly wants to rule the world with an Islamic government and sharia law.
It is inevitable that if we don't squash this ideology now - we will only have to deal with it later, perhaps when they are better equipped, better organized and better armed.

Answer 6

Thanks for reminding me.

I was for the Afghanistan war on 9/11/01 and I still am today.

I am not and never have been for the Iraq war.

You need to stop generalizing.

We are upset about more troops because Iraq was a mistake, and we should no longer throw more resources into it.

How could Hussein's party be a descendant of Hitler's party, they werent even the same religion, and neither had the same view on world issues.

You sound very ill-informed about what you talk about.

Sure Hussein was a bad guy, but there are worse people in the world that we should have made priority over him. They didnt have WMD's and if we had taken a little more time, we could have figured that out. Its not like they would nuke us in the middle of us searching their country. We need to use our resources to counteract countries with bad ambitions throughout the world. We shouldnt be stuck in Iraq trying to fix something we majorly screwed up.

Iraq had barely anything to do with the terrorist movement until we stepped in. We now have turned Iraq into a terrorist breeding ground. You think we are fighting terrorism by trying to kill terrorists. All we are doing is pissing the world off even more, so that they can recruit people easier.

By the way, its the Nazi party.
Dumbass.

Answer 7

I noticed you didn't mention Osama Bin Laden do you know that he was the one responsible for 9/11 and Bush let him get away with murdering 3000 innocent people but obviously oil meant more to him than people.So we haven't forgotten but others have and cant tell the difference between Saddam and Osama.

Answer 8

No.

On 9/12/01 we were all for going after the perpetrators -- who were not in Iraq but Afghanistan. Then Bush kept linking 9/11 to Iraq although as he later admitted "we have no evidence that Saddam was responsible for September the 11th".

You, however, are STILL linking Saddam and 9/11.

Answer 9

Some people, sadly, never really cared - they felt we "deserved" it. Yeah, 3000+ innocent people deserved to die for going to work. Dumbasses.

Some people would rather focus on hating Bush.

I will never forget - either one - but I don't think Saddam was involved in 9*11. I *do*, however, think CLINTON should have gone after Saddam again after that SOB violated the treaties he signed in the Gulf War.

Answer 10

I agree, if we hadnt backed out when we were over there back in Desert Shield/Desert Storm, we wouldn't be in this mess, we help out for a bit and then we pussyfoot out because of liberal pressures and then that country gets totally massacred and nobody else gives a crap because they're not over there to see it. Let a democrat come into office and bring everyone home and prepare for another 9-11.