2007-03-09 05:01:03 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Both.
Anything that might be used as justification to go to war in iraq was used by this administration.
They wanted to invade iraq for years while clinton was president, but he wouldn't do it. They wrote in their 'project for a new american century' manifesto that their agenda would take a long time to implement - barring some catastrophic event, like another pearl harbor.
They got their 'pearl harbor' on 9/11, and figured that they could use it as justification for whatever they wanted to do.
It worked for a while, but they neglected to remember that eventually people get tired of a rubber stamp, do-nothing congress, and will elect people who will provide actual oversight.
2007-03-09 05:14:24 · answer #1 · answered by joemammysbigguns 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Nightingale,
Not a single WMD found in Iraq? What is your basis for this? Brainwashing by the media? Perhaps you should read the Duelfer report on the search for WMDs. Despite searching only a small percentage of the weapons sites in the country, the inspectors found several chemical weapons. These are the same weapons that were supposed to have been destroyed back in the 1990s and that we were told didn't exist anymore. In addition, evidence of an entire poisons and toxins program that was never disclosed to the UN inspectors was found.
The same for al Qaeda. The senate intelligence committe report found and detailed numerous contacts between al Qaeda and Iraq. Yet we a constantly told by liberals that there was no contact between the two. I guess they never let the facts get in the way of a good lie.
2007-03-09 13:58:04 · answer #2 · answered by dsl67 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Neither. The decision, by Democrats and Republicans alike, was based on a "National Intelligence Estimate" report by Stu Cohen, who stated unequivocally that there were WMD's in Iraq. Many believed Cohen because Saddam was known to have had and used WMD's previously, and because Bill Clinton had failed to do anythng abouit the situation throughout his administration except for some fly-overs, so nobody but Saddam really knew what was there.
2007-03-09 13:14:05 · answer #3 · answered by senior citizen 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
WMD. 911 died down a little bit.
2007-03-10 08:02:11 · answer #4 · answered by Tropango 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This question is sooooo old. I'll tell you one more time what happened. Giant space ants are using mind control lasers to influence the president.
Destroy the space ants- end the war.
2007-03-09 13:52:47 · answer #5 · answered by idaho69442 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Lies about WMD and when they were proved to be lies they used 911 and fighting terrorism as another excuse.
2007-03-09 13:16:45 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Neither its based on the Israeli lobby lies.
2007-03-09 16:05:50 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Iraq was invaded by the us imperialist country headed by war monger George bush under the pretext that it had wmd but it could not find out even a single wmd in Iraq. another pretext was that Saddam had links with AL qaida which was responsible for 9/11, which is also a blatant lie. the us wanted to occupy Iraq for oil and invaded it. that 's all .
2007-03-09 13:08:37 · answer #8 · answered by nightingale 6 · 3⤊ 6⤋
Both. It was supposed to be "finding OBL", when America realized that OBL wasn't in Iraq, it was changed to "Saddam has WMD's" when that excuse was debunked, it was changed to "Liberating the Iraqi people". Bush has said he "no longer thinks of Osama Bin Laden". He conveniently stopped worrying about OBL as soon as he completed his vendetta against Hussein.
2007-03-09 13:09:53 · answer #9 · answered by alessa_sunderland 5 · 2⤊ 4⤋
Is your train of thought based on ignorence or stupidity?
2007-03-09 13:06:51 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋