As a hypothetical, knowing what you know today about how everything is going and how we didn't find any real Al-qaeda links to Sadaam and no WMDs. I'm not saying Sadaam was a saint by any means, but I still don't feel he was a threat to our national interests, seeing as he ran a more secular form of government when comparing his reign to others in the Middle East. What we have in Iraq now is a vacuum of power which is swiftly being filled with Radical Islam (which is our real enemy in this war). Do you wish Bush would have waited until he got better intelligence on the Iraq matter, or do you appreciate the "act now, ask questions later" approach? Is that way of thinking dangerous for the US? Your thoughts?
2007-03-12 07:59:30 · 14 answers · asked by ♥austingirl♥ 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
As someone who was against it from the first time I heard about it, I don't feel personally guilty -- there wasn't a friggin' thing I could do about it.
I have felt like "told you so!" ing everyone who used to argue with me, though I would MUCH rather it had not happened at all.
Thank you for raising the question of whether the "act now, ask questions later" approach is dangerous -- yes, indeed, it was.
Thing is, the info that all that bogus intelligence was bogus was available, but TV and front pages failed to mention any of it, and went along with the "people who say that are terrorists who hate America" line.
Congress let us down, the media let us down, and, I'm sad to say, a lot of Americans let us down.
(Though, as I recall, even though most Americans believed the lies about WMD and Iraq being behind 9/11, only 42% wanted war -- before it started -- while 48% opposed it. Imagine what those numbers would have been like if Americans had been told the truth!)
2007-03-12 15:01:30 · answer #1 · answered by tehabwa 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Let the guilt fall on the guilty. .
As of 9/11 the invasion of Iraq was a done deal, the only thing "intelligence" had to do with it was propaganda straight up. Fact is they made up their own intelligence so " waiting for better intelligence" doesn't apply in this situation.
I'd say that our uniform being trapped between a Civil war in Iraq with the express mission of seeing that neither side wins while the parent country of the 9/11 attack, Saudi Arabia, is considered our ally even though they have failed and failed miserable to clean house might be considered some what "dangerous" for the US.
At some point you have to ask just who is running this show anyway, Bush or his Saudi Royal business buddies?
One thing they sure as hell had in common, they both hated Sadam to the nines so maybe that helps explain why Iraq was attacked in retaliation for 9/11 and the Saudis were let slide for their involvement .Kindred spirits and common interests and all that.
2007-03-12 13:45:24 · answer #2 · answered by Daniel O 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I think it was a mistake. To be fair, in 2002 and 03 I gave Bush the benefit of the doubt. Sometimes government knows things we don't know.
But as time went on, I saw it was a huge, life-costing mistake on our part. I would have worked with the United Nations a little more to make sure we truly had all the facts before acting.
May I mention that I was not against us going to Afghanistan to search out Bin Laden after 9/11,but I feel our focus should have been on building up our armies, sharpening our intelligence, and getting real serious about security and border control for this country by using the 3000 + intelligent and brave young men that were killed over in Iraq under false pretenses. All that talent, wasted.
2007-03-12 08:17:56 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Sadaam constantly violated the terms of the 1991 cease fire, constantly ignored U.N resolutions, constantly funneled monies to support Palestinian terrorists.
Guilty ? No.
Wish it never happened? I wish it didn't have to happen but Sadaam was not going to give the world any other options.
Waiting for better intelligence? There had been 12 years of intelligence and actions on Sadaam part. We waited too long.
9/11 was just a catalyst the expedited the inevitable.
2007-03-12 19:48:36 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
How long do you wait for the intelligence reports to change? Since the end of Gulf War, intelligence from many countries said they had WMDs. Even during the Clinton administration, the intel reports said Iraq had and was developing WMDs.
As for feeling guilty about the war, I don't. I had nothing to do with making the decision to go to war. The one's that should feel guilty about it is the policy makers (President and those that were in Congress and approved it, like Hillary Clinton).
2007-03-12 08:05:27 · answer #5 · answered by Mutt 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
You mention waiting for better Intelligence but for years the Intel people have said the same. How do you know the intelligence is/was bad? People are quick to say that Saddam posed no threat but as a person who was in the region I would have to disagree. He did allow training camps of groups like Al-qaeda to exist in his country. He did allow safe harbor to terrorist. I also believe the Intel of something like 25 countries who said he had WMD's is correct. Just because the proverbial needle in the hay stack hasn't been found doesn't mean it's not there. All that being said I would have preferred that they had waited a little longer and went in with more fire power but the fact they went in does not bother me.
2007-03-12 08:28:03 · answer #6 · answered by joevette 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
There was more to going into Iraq than just WMD's. The US has/had an obligation to the people of Iraq and the Middle East as a whole to help bring about a democratic form of government and help it survive and thrive. I will never feel guilty for giving another nation the gift of political, social, and religious freedom.
2007-03-12 08:05:32 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Not at all. I think the War was the right thing to do, and I believe we should stay until the job is done! Just imagine what innocent women and children would still be going through if we had not done something!!! And, is this world not a better place without Sadam Hussein???
2007-03-12 09:22:12 · answer #8 · answered by On Time 3 · 1⤊ 3⤋
In a way it's our flult because we voted for Gorge Bush for- not once- but twice. We shouldn't have voted for him in the first place because he was from the very start crazy about getting the oil from them to make america rich with the stuff. We should of learned our misake when our current president messed up a long time ago......
2007-03-12 08:17:39 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Why should I feel guilty about loosing 3000+ people in one day - those people mean nothing to me - when it is your time to go - it is just your time to go.
Bring home the troops - and when more attacks happen on our land - just remember - it is your time to die.
What do you call a device that kills over 1000 people - a weapon of minimum destruction? Just how many did Sadam kill, rape and torture? It was more than 1000.
2007-03-12 10:40:35 · answer #10 · answered by Gladiator 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋