Bush said, "The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September 11, 2001, and still goes on."
2007-02-24 02:37:30 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
It's obvious. Saddam and Osama are the SAME person, wearing two masks. He appears variously in Iraq and Afghanistan because he has TELEPORTING POWERS. These were gained when Sodama Hussaden was dropped in a vat of radioactive fluid when trying to construct a WMD. He attacked on 9/11 by messing up the controls of planes using his FREAKY MIND BEAMS. We got him in the end though, so you don't need to worry about Osama anymore.
2007-02-24 02:43:07 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Guess you need to listen to the speaker of the house. Some think it is about oil. Not true, but what would we do with out that oil. Most would lose our job. Couldn't heat our homes. Cars would be obsolete. If we don't fight terror in Iraq for the few freedoms we have left, and the terrorist win we will end living like the poor people in Iraq. If you listen to the liberals they don't want to stop fighting in Iraq. They say they want a change. What is that change? To lose!
2007-02-24 11:01:27 · answer #2 · answered by bigh5586 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nothing. And nobody with any sense thinks it does any more. The commission given the task of investigating 911 said that although Bin Laden met with an Iraqi official in 1994, there was no credible evidence that there is a link between the two and the attack. Bin Laden did seek to create an Islamic army to topple the US, and he asked the leaders of many Muslim countries for assistance - including Iran, Sudan and Afghanistan. Iraq never responded to his requests for training camps and weapons.
Also, the meeting between Mohamed Atta (pilot of one of the planes to hit the WTC) and an Iraqi official has been dismissed as false.
The real question is; did the Bush administration know that the information was false? Did they find out it wasn't true at the last minute, and then didn't bother to correct anyone? Or were they genuinely fooled by the incompetent flaws of their intelligence agencies information?
2007-02-24 10:57:55 · answer #3 · answered by Mordent 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Bush admitted Iraq had "NOTHING" to do with 9/11.
2007-02-24 11:54:35 · answer #4 · answered by mikeygonebad07 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Oil. It was a convenient time to lay the pipeline that we wanted. Why else do you think we are paying billions of dollars to Halliburton to be there? A better question would be, why are we still there? Saddam is dead...we've got our oil....I think we are trying to secure a definite reason to go to war with Iran.
2007-02-24 10:48:22 · answer #5 · answered by nigeledcat 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Terrorism is terrorism.
A terrorist is defined as someone who targets civilians for mass murder.
What are WMD for?
2007-02-24 18:24:15 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Quantum Physics lol
2007-02-24 10:45:10 · answer #7 · answered by mr_63impala 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hussein harbored terrorists, and mass-murdered hundreds of thousands of his own people, and more mass graves are turning up. You really want this guy in power?
2007-02-24 10:44:39 · answer #8 · answered by bigsey93bruschi54 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Not one damn thing, our President lied to Congress and to the American people.
2007-02-27 20:51:33 · answer #9 · answered by a Historian 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nothing. Its just an excuse to get more money for his big oil business cronies.
2007-02-24 10:53:56 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋