Why was deposing Saddam Hussien important?

Question

I know it was an objective discussed long before we declared 'the war on terror". I feel they tied it in with 9-11 to gain the support they needed. There may have been a legitimate reason it should have been done, his ties to terrorism are not established to my knowledge. He had biological weapons at one point, and was gaining nuclear power until Isreal knocked out the plant, I think in the late 80's . It doesn't seem he was an immediate threat to our country,I would have felt better if they had spent the billions on border security, disaster preporations, and intelligence gathering. I don't think our governments past or present administrations are idiots, I do think they keep a lot from the common people- who they feel don't have enough interest, knowledge,, education, and intelligence to just be told the facts and make good decisions. So is there an uncommon person on yahoo answers who has the time and knowledge to explain to me why was it important that we get rid of Saddam?

Answer 1

Ties to terrorism not established? Are you kidding me? He was very open in his support for Hamas. Abu Nidal was found IN Iraq. Ansar al Islam (with or without his knowledge) operated openly. PFLP??? C'mon!! Saddam's ties to terror span 3 different presidencies and 6 sessions of Congress.

The "tie-in" to 9/11 was that it proved that the US could no longer ignore terror supporting regimes.

Regime change in Iraq wasn't an idea formed on 9/12. It had been for a long time. It was for these reasons that Congress passed Public Law 105-338 and Public Law 105-174. IN 1998!!


On edit: Its difficult to read this question with a straight face after reading bia bia's response.

Answer 2

because GWB is very good at using propaganda and confusing the issues so the truth can't be seem. When no major cache of WMD could be found, when no ties could be made between Saddam and Bin Laden he "modified" the reasons for the invasion. Saddam was nothing more than one of the cheerleaders for the terrorists. He was too self absorbed and too money hungry to give any support to Al Quada or allow them safe haven.
The fact remains that 15 Saudis, 3 Iranians and 1 Yemen was the scope of the assault force for 9/11 yet we haven't done anything in regards to them except call Saudi Arabia our ally and yet there are those that think our attacking a potentially minor player was the proper thing to do. By that reasoning we should have declared war on the Vatican instead of Germany in 1941.

Answer 3

Saddam Hussein was never a threat to us and in fact kept that part of the world under control. He was indeed a dictator that operated with cruelty and allowed his sons to rape and murder at will. Did he have WMD's ?? They haven't been found as of yet and each day that goes by it seems less apparent that he had any. It seems that the real reason for our invasion was that Bush felt he had to capture and destroy Saddam because Saddam had threatened Bush's' father in the past. Cheney kept driving that fact home until Bush felt that he had no alternative but to destroy Saddam. Being of limited intelligence Bush was not hard to convince by Cheney.

Answer 4

There are many reasons the current administration and their iron clad partnership with the government of Israel needed Saddam out of power. Afghanistan was attacked for a huge Caspian Sea oil pipeline project. Iraq was attacked for its vast oil reserves. Both were attacked for the security of Israel's illegal occupation. Saddam was not afraid to point out the many atrocities and human rights violations of Israel, which far exceeded anything he had ever allowed in his country, contrary to media induced public belief. Lest we forget that he also attacked Israel. I knew he was going to be on the hit list from that moment on. God forbid someone attacks Israel, but they are free to kill as they please and attack Palestine and Lebanon without the world batting an eyelash. To answer your question plain and simple, it was not in our interest to take down Saddam, but for the interest of Israel. It was actually in our best interest to stay out of Israel's greed and ethnic cleansing campaign all together, yet we are funding the whole thing. We are not liberating anyone in Iraq, unless I am mistaken and the definition of "liberating" has now been changed to killing, raping, stealing and oppressing. Last time I checked, that wasn't the case.

Answer 5

I think the real plan was Iran.

If you had a democratic-America friendly Afghanistan and a democratic-America friendly Iraq (both border Iran), Iran could find itself between a rock and a hard place.

Add to it that fact that Saddam was kicking out UN inspectors, and not letting them see what they wanted, it added to the suspicion.

Answer 6

Saddam Hussein was tried and executed for crimes against his own people. You can beat this: Should we be in Iraq stuff to death. Hindsight is 20/20. The U.S, most of the world, and the U.N. all thought he was a grave threat to the free peoples of the world.

Answer 7

Look, Saddam was supporting and financing al-Queda, he was meeting with them, treating their top terrorists in Bagdad Hospitals. He was a rat who financed the suicide bombers. He gave the families of the bombers $300,000 each after they blew themselves up, to support the family of the suicide bomber. That makes Iraq a key element in the war. And Al-Queda had an office in Downtown Bagdad. It's sign said "Al-queda." Al-Queda and Iraq were allies.

Answer 8

The Oedipus complex in Freudian psychoanalysis refers to [a] stage of psychosexual development in childhood where children... regard their father as an adversary and competitor for the exclusive love of their mother.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oedipus_complex

Answer 9

Hey I got a ideal...when it come to the next president, nobody vote for anyone...Lets see who get elected

Answer 10

Because Bush declared it to be important.

It was an arbitrary decision, based on either incomplete or obsolete information.