Bush supporters: If we can go back in time would you still have invaded IRAQ?

Question

Be honest here. Don't be embarrassed. Only understanding the cause will we find the cure. So be totally honest. Please it's for everyones own good.

Tsk..tsk..denial after denial. I noticed that not only are you Bush supporters are in denial but also arrogant to the point that you would rather save face than saving our country and human lives. Sad really sad.

Answer 1

Of course they would. They still believe in it and they hate the middle east so much that some even want to nuke the entire region.

Answer 2

I don't have the one piece of information I need in order to give you an honest and comprehensive answer: knowledge of what would have happened had we NOT invaded.

We had 150,000 troops there, colling their heels while Saddam played cat-and-mouse with the inspectors. Our troops would probably have been picked off where they were. Pressure would have built even more for lifting the sanctions (the US was blamed for the starvation resulting from Saddam not using the oil for food money to feed his own people), and in the end the US could have backed down, leaving him in place with whatever plans he had, and showing that the US talks tough but does nothing.

I'd say that as bad as it is now, we're still better off then we would have been had we not dealt with Saddam.

Then again, maybe the people would have risen up against Saddam and taken him out and set up a friendly, peaceful democracy all on their own, without any American help. How likely is that? About as probable as being bitten by a shark while visiting the Grand Canyon.

People asking the question you did seem to make the mistake of unconsciously believing that "Saddam was no threat, and he never would have been," something we definitely don't know and which runs 180 degrees counter to the warnings of two administrations, and many others.

Iraq is a mess. I've said it.

But I hope I have given you something to think about also.

I won't give an unqualified "yes" to your question, since we don't know what WOULD have happened had a different course been taken.

Will you also be intellectually honest and not give an unqualified ""no"?

It's perfectly defensible to say pre-emption is not a good idea. But no one knows whether we are better off, worse, or the same. Not without a crystal ball.

Answer 3

Well, Liberals and Democrats on here are always upset at us Conservatives and Republicans for bringing up the past mistakes of Bill clinton. So I'm gonna say the same thing. Let's stop bringing up the past mistakes of this presidency as well. The past is done and over with. We need to focus on the present, we are there, and there's nothing anyone can do about it now. The best thing we can do now is support the mission. Which I think a lot of people don't even know what the mission is anymore. Once the Iraqi security forces can handle things on their own, we will withdraw, just like Brittain is doing. It's obviously working in other areas of Iraq or there wouldn't be withdrawals. War is not easy. When we first invaded, people thought it was going to be a quick and easy invasion. Now that the realities are sinking in, people don't like it. The reality is, that we are there and we are moving forward with the mission. The mistakes of this war as in all past wars, will be learned from in future conflicts. We have made mistakes, but this conflict is not lost. So the best thing to do is support our troops and their mission. We will prevail.

Answer 4

Yes. The mistake was not the invasion of Iraq. Hussein was an evil man who had violated all the U.N. resolutions. All the evidence was pointing to WMDs. Yes, WMDs. The problem has been our occupation/transition. We didn't secure the borders. We left our soldiers and Iraqi civilians open to terrorists (from all over the world). I'm not sure how it will end up.

Answer 5

Yes. But with more troops so that we could have nipped it in the bud and it wouldnt be going on for soo long as it has. I do blame bush for that and rummy because the generals wanted more troops and he fired them. The iraq war is just, you can use all the cleche liberal phrases you want but there is a real enemy, its like when we faught hitler having people say there are no nazi's untill we came. Its jsut crazy, but I agree we should have hit them harder from the beginning to inimize civilian loses. They are the ones blowing up markets and mosques NOT THE CONSERVATIVES YOU DAMN LIBS!

Answer 6

Am not a Bush Supporter but i do believe that we should have invaded Iraq because, this is a war that has to be fought! And if we fight on our soil we will lose way more than the little troops we already have!!( I do support our troops)

Answer 7

I would have been for pursueing OBL until he was caught first. But yes Saddam needed to be removed. The UN was doing a big nothing.

Answer 8

Yes, Absolutly. Your arrogance shows your complete ignorance though. So I add this at the risk of arguing with a "useful idiot".

Before the leftists whine and complain, let me ask if you could go back in time, would you have stopped Code Pink from sending $600,000 to the terrorists in Falluja? They brag about it on their webpage still! Shall we talk about aiding the enemy? The ironic part is the "anti-war" crowd would be the first killed if their Islamic terrorist "allies" win.

And before you leftists dhimmis say anything else, not only do I support this fight, but I am HERE in Iraq. Yes, an answer from just behind Saddam's old "presidential palace". I FULLY support this war and am here, voluntarily, fighting it. Oh, and as an officer, I have a college education, and my grades were much better than Kerry's. Just in case you chose to use the "dumb soldier" angle.

But why did we go to war? Here you are:
-Saddam continued to violate the Gulf War Cease Fire protocols continuously for 12 years. That is 12 YEARS of diplomacy, sanctions, limited bombings, threats of more land actions, more failed diplomacy, more threats, more of Saddam thumbing his nose at the world while he illegally rearmed.

-Saddam, and others, violated the "oil for food program" to the tune of billions of dollars/euros.

-Saddam, very publically, financed terrorists in Palestine and had contacts with Al Qaeda. These include meetings with known operatives in the Czech Republic (confirmed by Czech internal security forces), the Salmon Pak (South of Baghdad) and the Ansar al-Islam (northern Iraq area) terrorist training camps (One of them held a painting of the WTC burning while Saddam smoked a cigar).

-Provided medical aid and training for Al Qaeda as they fled the Afghan area. A case in point is the confession by Al Qaeda terrorists captured in Jordan (2004) when they attempted to conduct a WMD attack (Sarin gas and 70 other chemicals:20 tons total, w/explosives: see links) in Amman, Jordan. These terrorists told the story of how they escaped Afghanistan, fled to Iraq, followed the convoys hauling goods out of Iraq before the Coalition invasion (remember those? The media doesn't and they reported them), and ended up in the Becca Valley with the WMDs and Iraqi forces, working for a man named Zarqari. Name ring a bell?

-Openly defied UN resolutions, many with use of force clauses.

-Even during their final inspection in 2003, the UN teams were still finding MORE chemical weapons systems that Iraq "forgot" to document. Also included in the same report was two Iraqi surface to surface missile systems which greatly exceeded the range limitation stipulated by the cease fire (UN report titled: s-2003-232 :Twelfth quarterly report of the Executive Chairman of the
United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection
Commission in accordance with paragraph 12 of Security
Council resolution 1284 (1999))

-Continued attacks on Coalition aircraft patrolling the No-Fly Zones.

-Sorties by MIG-25RB Aircraft into the southern No-Fly Zone (how he got those and maintained them with "sanctions" in place is a really good question).

-Attempted to assassinate a former US President.

-Provided aid and comfort to terrorists retreating from Afghanistan

-Saddam had WMDs. Every nation consulted (France, UK, Russia) and the UN all agreed he had them. Saddam boasted of fooling the inspectors in the 90s. We attacked him several times with aircraft and missiles in the 90s. Clinton even ordered the commencement of "Operation Desert Fox" to punish Iraq for non-compliance with inspectors.

-WMDs have been found all over Iraq. Usually in smaller amounts, but this is to be expected with the amount of warning Saddam had of the invasion.

Answer 9

Yes, time doesn't change the fact that Saddam Hussein was an evil oppresive dictator.

Answer 10

Oh yes, well actually I would of dropped a nuke on their towl wearin a$$'s so drop to your knees right now and thank the good lord above that I 'm not the president cause my plan would have killed us all!!!!

Answer 11

Yes but it would'nt have been finished in 1991. It should have been finished the first time we hit them instead of being dragged out the way it was.