Bush killed Saddam for NOT having WDMs?

Question

Bush started the war because he said Saddam had WDMs but none were found yet Saddam was executed very quickly. None of this makes a lick of sense to me. Why are we fighting Iraqi for 3 years for weapons they DID not have when the 9/11 perps - the Saudi's and Bin Laden are ignored?

Answer 1

The Bush regime totally "raped" the checks and balance system, the integrity of the United Nations, and also foreign policy.

Answer 2

Let's see...where to start? OK. First President Bush didn't kill Saddam. If you actually saw the news Saddam was convicted by an Iraqi court and executed (which is legally different from killed...a nuance that apparently escapes you) under Iraqi law by Iraqis. I have seen the video of the hanging and I didn't see President Bush on the gallows...did you?

There were WMDs in Iraq. When will you non military types begin to understand that WMDs include chemical and biological weapons as well as nuclear weapons. Since it is a fact that Saddam used chemical weapons on his own people and leaking chemical munitions were found buried in Iraq that qualifies and proved the existence of WMDs in Iraq.

As for Saddam being executed quickly....it took what...4 years to happen? And to top it off either you don't really know what's going on, don't truly follow the war or just repeat what you hear. Why? The war in Iraq i in its 5th year...not its 3rd year as you mistakenly claim.

Get you facts correct please. And yes, I am a former US Army officer trained in NBC and as a nuclear weapons officer. And I spent 18 months in Iraq.

Answer 3

searching at lots of the previous solutions jogs my memory that those who shout loudest have the least to say and the most to cover. The Iraqis that Saddam killed were regularly killed with the conivance and appoval of england and u.s., no longer that Britain has had an self sufficient voice for years, and we killed many with the sanctions we imposed on Iraq, which the politicians knew and probable became hoping stands out as the case, so that they could portray what were their murderous tyrant as now an self sufficient murderous tyrant. try searching in the back of the headlines, a number of you.

Answer 4

None of it makes sense. What makes less sense is that we helped get Iraq out of Kuwait in 1990 and didn't invade or arrest Saddam when we knew he had gased the Kurds... what he was hung for. Why now and not then?

Answer 5

Territorial Pissing! Its a chess match, we need that piece. Bush takes the heat from the american public the imbiciles or opposers.
THE PUBLIC IS SO STUPID. Bush vs. Democrats bull$h#t.
It's about power and energy and without it you wouldn't be able to watch the crap they are pumping out on T.V. or be surfing on the internet in your heat or air conditioning.
We get Iraq next we get the rest. Doesn't matter who is president. Democrats ducked out they have Bush to blame now.
What would they have done? Let them blow up every metro area before making a point? We take Iraq we control the middle east. America blames Bush then we can say that we really didn't mean to kill a bunch of people. Bullshit! Take away your car for a week and all your other toys. See how nice you are then.

Answer 6

Ummm... coz FOX news said so?????

I dunno.. good question..

Didn't Saddam kill like a million trillion Kurds with American chemicals ??? I think in the end he was hung for that reason.. which I agree.. makes no sense at all.. in fact.. everyone remotely connected to Saddams leadership team has now been singled out and executed.. one by one.. looks like no one is gonna ever tattle tell now...

Answer 7

Um, are you forgetting that Saddam has killed thousands if not millions of his own people? I'm pretty sure he used chemical weapons on them. And we've been fighting for four years, not three.

Answer 8

The US invaded Iraq not for WMDs but for oil. Saddam Hussien was executed because of the atrocities that he committed against the ethnic groups opposed to his rule. The US is still in Iraq to guarantee that oil will be definitely bought by US companies.

Answer 9

Sad Dam was tried, convicted, and executed by Iraqi courts under Iraqi laws. That's the way it is. Nothing more.

Answer 10

Bush needed a reason to fight his addys personal battle. It is that simple. He is more interested in enriching himself while in power he forgot that he is supposed ot be American and be fighting FOR Americans not against.
bush is no better then bin laden or Saddam, only difference is he is doing it on national television and openly and will NEVER get put on trial for his war crimes BUT HE SHOULD!

Answer 11

You need to read a decent newspaper. Firstly, this war in Iraq has been going on for 4 years, not 3. Secondly, Saddam was NOT executed quickly. He was captured on December 13, 2003, and his trial began in October 2006. That's almost three years. Thirdly, he was tried for his acts relating to the executions of 148 Iraqi Shi'ites suspected of planning an assassination attempt against him, and was sentenced to death by hanging.