English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

9 answers

We invaded Iraq not because Saddam was strong and an immediate threat but rather he was weak, problematic and control of Iraq and it’s resources would be strategically advantageous.
The tactical reasons are obvious. The Oil and Iraq’s strategic location from the stand point of military bases in order to control oil resources in the entire region.
The political motives are more complex.
Bush Junior and his cabinet for the most part objected to Bush senior leaving Sadam in power after the first Gulf war.
Sanctions started by Bush Sr. and carried on by two terms in office by Clinton had left Iraq in a terrible state in which corrupt government continued to prosper and carry out excesses against any that would oppose them, all the while at the expense of the people who perished to the tune of 1.5 million or more( mostly children) due primarily to lack of proper nutrition , lack of potable water, and lack of proper Medical attention all of which Saddam was able to blame on the West’s policy of Sanctions.
The motivation for them to carry out the invasion when they did and the way that they did was 9/11.
“Make hay while the sun shines”
Prior to 9/11 another major military invasion into Iraq was a hard sell to make to the American people.
In the words of PNAC (the Neo Conservative “ Project for the New American Century” ) an event on the order of Pearl Harbor was needed in order gain the public support required to do so .
So it was not so much because they thought Iraq was responsible for 9/11 but more because 9/11 enabled them to gain the public support they needed to carry out the invasion.
Again it was the OIL and Military bases they were/are ultimately after, WMD and Alkaeda connections were used as tools of propaganda and 9/11 served to justify and bolster the propaganda . IMHO The Administration felt confident it would be easy enough to find a couple of Al Kaeda members in the general population and enough WMD bits and pieces scattered about to back up their rhetoric once they demonstrated to the world that a thriving and secure Iraq was setting an outstanding model of Democracy in the Mid East.

Considering what actually developed out of all this the only honorable course of action left is that of reconciliation, reconstruction, and repairing the public security as best we can without overtly taking sides or trying to micro manage a Civil War.
IMO Unfortunately Iraqi’s have been left with little alternative but to fight it out till it burns out and some power emerges that restores public security.
This is not a solution but rather a situation that has arisen out of circumstance.
Plans of continuing on with overt demands for Private US oil exploitation, political manipulation and usury as a Military base of operations to expand the war on into Iran and Syria have been dashed by shear ineptitude, dishonesty and deceit carried out by the Administration.
IMO The most we can ask of the people of Iraq at this juncture is a reasonable guarantee that they will not engage in all the terrible untrue things we accused them of engaging in as a premise to blow their infrastructure and public security to smithereens in the first place.

2007-02-23 06:14:26 · answer #1 · answered by Daniel O 3 · 1 0

Don't listen to derogatory comments about your being too young to know something...

The Bush administration subscribes to the Neo-conservative notion of imperialist aggression -- their goal is to control (not simply secure access to) the oil supply of the Middle East.

Is it worth the American lives lost? Is it worth the deaths of innocent civilians in the invaded country? Many, many people do not think so.
Probably those who think it's "worth it" are the same people who believe

America never fought an unjust war
or
What's good for the war wachine is what's good for America.

Beliefs which are patently false.

2007-02-23 02:21:26 · answer #2 · answered by Tom K 3 · 0 0

Why are attacking other countries? Do you remember 911? We always react when we are attacked. Our only problem is that Iraq is fast becoming politics as usual. Let the military handle this and politicians butt out. It could had been over long ago if we were not so liberal about it.

2007-02-23 01:28:10 · answer #3 · answered by B O B Bob 1 · 1 1

It is about self preservation. I remember when I was young and we were fearful of Russia. You do not want any other country to get the upper hand you are too young to know.

2007-02-23 01:43:44 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

I believe that our soliders are dying in vain...there's no way anyone could convince me otherwise...nothing is worth the lives being lost and hearts being broken around the world..

2007-02-23 01:26:52 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

america is invading other countries because bush is in office. it was downright peaceful before he elected himself.

but bush senior has a long history of this very sort of activity.

2007-02-23 01:14:52 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

If the islamo facists succeed you will not be able to post your drivel on Yahoo answers any longer.

2007-02-23 06:25:29 · answer #7 · answered by mr_methane_gasman 3 · 1 0

DONT ELECT THE BUSH FAMÄ°LY FOR THE 3 RD TIME :))

2007-02-23 06:50:10 · answer #8 · answered by MORTİCİA 4 · 0 1

we are the policeman of the world.

2007-02-23 22:30:33 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers