2007-03-08 10:27:28 · 22 answers · asked by zagarof 2 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Oil and arms sales.
If it is because of innocent people being killed then why not invade Israel?
2007-03-08 10:32:45 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 6⤋
We have been at war with radical Islam since Iran took our embassy people hostage during the Carter administration. We chose to ignore this disease known as international terrorism for decades. We finally realized that we are at war after the attack on 9/11. The only reason it ended up in Iraq right now is Saddam overplayed his hand. He would still be in power if he had cooperated with the UN inspectors. He liked making everyone believe he had horrible weapons. After 9/11 we could not take the chance that he did and might provide the technology to terrorists. Since we were still at war with Iraq since Dessert Storm, we took the opportunity to take out his perceived threat.
The terror supporting countries in the region realize the threat to them that a Free Iraq would pose, have been supporting the insurgency with money and sophisticated weapons. The disease of fundamentalist Islam tyranny cannot abide the cure that liberty brings to the long suffering people of the Middle East.
2007-03-08 21:47:36 · answer #2 · answered by Jacob W 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The United States is a part of a U.N. coalition which attacked the country after over 10 years of negotioation attempts failed to convince Saddam Hussein to stop killing his own people (perhaps 600,000 murders) and threatening his neighbors..It was a totally different reason than the Afghanistan war against the Taliban.
The current war effort is to stop insurgent forces, local militias, and warring tribes which are attempting to keep Iraq from forming and maintaining it's own elected government.
2007-03-08 18:38:26 · answer #3 · answered by ©2009 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Because I do not know where you are from or where your loyalties lie, I will try to not inflict you with opinion, only what I remember to be "facts"--hearing in the news broadcast in the USA before the invasion of Iraq: the Whitehouse was saying that Iraq was a very certain danger to the world because they possessed things called WMD's; and I remember wondering what that phrase meant as the newscasters kept saying it all the time like everyone knew what it meant. I did not know but assumed everyone else did. Apparently our Whitehouse was in the same predicament as me. And to confuse things even more, the vice-president of the USA was saying that Iraq had ties to Al-Quaida (who attacked us on 9/11). And he told us via our news channels on TV that he was certain of this. Shame on me for not investigating on my own what the he*l Iraq was all about before we invaded. To many American's credit, many did fight back to not attack Iraq--to wait and learn more and evaluate facts. But our soldiers were ordered to go over there, so they had to. It is very sad for USA and for the Iraqi people who had never even thought about the USA before. Shame shame shame on me and every other American who believes the cr*p they are told on TV.
2007-03-08 18:51:54 · answer #4 · answered by catcha22 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Three possible answers.
One, because Bush Jr. had a score to settle with Saddam, because of the conflict between Saddam and Bush Sr.
Two, because Saddam was a bad person and the US decided that he shouldn't remain in power.
Three, because the US wanted Iraqi oil, and knocking out the existing government was (thought to be) an easy way to get it.
"Nation building" and "spreading democracy" weren't even mentioned for the first year after the invasion, so they don't count as reasons to go in the first place. Whether they are valid reasons to stay or not after the fact is an unrelated question.
2007-03-08 18:32:20 · answer #5 · answered by coragryph 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋
At this point, unless you're a dumba** liberal, it doesn't matter. The point is we're there and so are the bad guys. So let's just finish the job. What's the point in leaving Iraq to the terrorist? We'll just had to go back in some day soon and do this all over again. Add to that, do you really want to leave that much oil wealth in a country that will surely be a haven for terrorism in the world?
2007-03-08 18:47:42 · answer #6 · answered by silly-asious 2 · 2⤊ 4⤋
Ten years of sanctions and reduced oil sales left Iraq with the largest oil reserves in the middle east, they got it and we want it. all the rest is just fools babble. now that western oil companies have control as per the new Iraqi Hydrocarbon law. Also see Hubert's peak theory of oil depletion. They say it's not about oil so it absolutly is. when Saddam gassed Kurds we didn't even blink, when he killed Iranians we sent him weapons and supplied him with anything he needed.
2007-03-08 18:51:31 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
because pres bush told saddam to hand over the weapons of mass destruction or let us in iraq to get them. saddam didnt and after several warnings, pres bush sent our troops in to get the weapons and to arrest saddam for all the deaths that he caused.
2007-03-08 18:41:03 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Bearass' George Exxon Bush
2007-03-08 18:33:10 · answer #9 · answered by tom l 6 · 2⤊ 5⤋
America not like Saddam. America like oil. America like lucrative military contracts for vice president. America like to change focus away from Afgahnistan and Osama, he family of important Saudi family. ..Did I say America? I should have said President Bush.
2007-03-08 18:33:53 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋
We went in there because bush needed and issue to fight for the election with. We went in their to defend our ability to get in there. Maybe in the back of our mind was the idea to stop terrorism and we have had terrible consequences
2007-03-08 18:45:26 · answer #11 · answered by Joshua K 1 · 2⤊ 3⤋