If you were President would you have attacked Iraq?

Question

If you were the President of the United States would you have attacked Iraq or would you have gone to Afghanistan to find Usama Bin Laden.

What was the main reason for going to war with Iraq WMD or isolating the area and creating a killing field?

Answer 1

no and i would have looked bin ladin

Answer 2

Yes, there is no question in my mind i would have gone after Iraq. I would have had units in Afghanistan 1 hour after 9/11, but i would have went into Iraq sooner. It may not be a war that we are used to as in WWI and WWII, but it is still war. They are both enemies of freedom, so i would have taken both out and than let the UN clean up.

Answer 3

Iraq no but without hesitation Afghanistan. The George Walker Bush Administration have a weak foreign policy and fight for the wrong reasons. And now they want a war against Iran. Why is he avoiding questions about the "scooter" case since he knows the truth?

Answer 4

I would have used CIA or some other means to get rid of Saddam! As far as Bush attacking Iraq because of Osama that makes no sense since Saudi Arab and Iraq were enemies and Saddam did not have anything to do with Osama. Osama most likely died in the caves of Afghanistan since he was on kidney dialysis. So the answer is no I would have never attacked Iraq!
It is obvious that he attacked for other reasons and not because of weapons nor because he cared so much for the people of Iraq! The man does not value human life unless it is one of his own!

Answer 5

I believe the initial strategy to invade Afghanistan, then Iraq were good plans. And militarily, they were implemented well. The post-invasion strategies were, however, not well thought out and have bogged down the momentum into a quagmire.

The way to defeat terror is to take the fight to the terrorists. Keep them on the run, expose them when you can, kill them once you find them.

You cannot place combat troops in the role of police officers and expect to continue a moving, fluid fight with terrorists.

We should turn Iraq over to their own forces, come what may, and move on to grind these terrorists into powder before they can gain a foothold somewhere and plan more attacks.

Answer 6

i wouldnt have attacked Iraq. I was against it during all the nutty conspiracy stuff (they got the bomb they got WMD) was being talked about. Its amazing that we as a culture frown on UFO's etc but things that clearly arent so are encouraged and accepted because the FBI/CIA thinks it is likely?? I think alot of what is said is conspiracy theory talk a few far to the extreme of possibility claim what they say is true and its propagated thru Fox News, Time magazine, ABC, CBS, NBC and becomes true.

Answer 7

it is not a question, if some one attacked your country and if you didnot attack that ''enemy'' it is politically suicide!! so i would attacked, but i do not know what was behind 9/11, there are many rumers about it, that it was bush that actually took control of it, it is debatable, so ill leave it there, but i would attacked iraq for the reason of terro, and the first gulf war was never officially ended, only cease fire treaty was signed and peace treaty was not, so i would of done it , but i would retreated already, because there were no weapon of mass destruction. but what bush is doing is to stay there, because if he retreat all of the soldires from there it means that he was wrong, and he will be critisized, i would insted send all of the troops to afganistan, and dont spread democracy, because democracy is not wanted by the iraq citizens, and if they dont want it, then it will not work!

Answer 8

I would've stayed and divert the maximum amount of resources in Afghanistan and rape Osama, instead of doing this joke of a war in Iraq. Really, what're the troops fighting for again? Liberating the country? What country would spend billions of dollars on liberating another and ask for nothing in return? There's definitely a hidden agenda in there somewhere.

Answer 9

As a military tactician, I would not have invaded Iraq. Of course, I was not privy to the intel that would be necessary for such a decision, but my feeling after watching it unfold is that my instincts were right. It is a part of the world that is so unlike our thinking that you cannot win a war there. You can pacify them for a time, but win over the long term, no. We have special forces units specifically trained for the assignments necessary to accomplish any military goal we might have had, and that would have kept our main forces out of another lose-lose situation. That said, had I been active at the time the commander-in-chief said go, I would have gone.

Answer 10

I don't know of the full circumstances with Iraq at that time, but from what I understand, we thought Iraq was a threat. If I was the president, I would attack. I believe the president is protecting our country. Even though Iraq turned out not to be so threatening, it was better to find out the easier way.

Answer 11

I would have bombed Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, Egypt and Saudi Arabia (yes, Saudi is where most of the terrorist came from) back to the stone age and then surrounded their oil fields and pumped them dry. No more money, no more terrorist threat.

Vote for me in 08 and I'll make it happen. Cheap gas, no loss of American lives and not terrorist activity; what do you say?