What would America do?

Question

What if a country stronger than America invaded America because it believed if would find WMDs (which it would).

What would America do? Probably defend itself by using underhanded tricks to repel the invaders. Tricks such as roadside bombs. American civilians would fight back in droves calling upon the aid of God. The American reaction to this type of situation would be similar to the Iraqi reaction presently.

How can America be justified when similar acts against them would be considered a great injustice?

Answer 1

I somehow think that- if such a situation actually happened- some French citizens, also Australians and Brazilians came to the US and began blowing up shopping malls full of US citizens and/or machinegunning people on the street (and similar tactics)... somehow I don't think that it would be considered "justified action" or even "attempt to defend against an invasion".

Simply because the bulk of the people murdered in Iraq are Iraqui citizens, murdered by foreigners (who happen to have the same religion but not the same politics) in the name of creating a fantasy land which would mirror Pol Pot's Cambodia or North Korea- with a religious fig leaf.

Regardless of any other justifications, it is plain to see that the bulk of the Iraqui people want democracy (not perfect but works) rather than any dictatorship- religious or otherwise. They've had several elections and the pro-dictator parties got nowhere.

And also regardless of any other arguments- the Coalition troops are there simply because the UN and the legal, elected Iraqui government want them to be there.

(FYI the US is exactly under the same type of occupation today. The occupying power is called the IRS)

Answer 2

Hard to speculate what might happen.. because it is such an outrageous thought. But history might suggest a few grim hints..
1. Governmant would react faster with the finger-pointing over the failed attempt at controlling the security breach then to acutally work as a team towards finding a solution to the issue at hand.
2. People would panic and cause more harm than good.
3. The Media would begin their repusive drool-fest over a hot story to beat beyond oblivion (at everyone elses expense)
4. Responsibility for controlling the situation will be handed from person to person like a hot potato, because nobody wants to deal with the ramifications of being held accountible for what might someday be looked apon as a unsatisfactory decision (but will be second and third-guessed until the end of time regardless of the outcome)
5. Some power hungry idiot will eventually get the final say to make the impulsive decision to start using the WMD's we have to begin the countdown to the end of the world by using the invasion as an excuse to take advantage of the situation (and the raw emotion of the people of the country) and strike out at whoever is on the top of the current list of enemy states to be dealt with.

And, the really sad part is .. the whole thing probably started in a hotel lobby because some world leader was frustrated with the outcome of a game of paper-rock-scissors.

Answer 3

Do you think that the attacks on Iraq were ever justified? No, the civilians did not deserve to be dragged into the middle of this. And yes, America would do the same. There is something called Nationalism and it is usually the second reason people fight, the first being their religion, whatever it may be. America may never be forgiven for what we did, but we took a step in the right direction by tearing down their weak government and replacing it with a more stable government and helping them establish a stronger military force.

Answer 4

America would fight back in any way it could. A note to CJ down there: there were no more WMDs (you know, the ones America helped supply in the first place, when Saddam was America's friend). Oh, and Bush Snr only attacked Iraq after the invasion of Kuwait because the British,hoping to keep trade ties with Kuwait secure, begged him to. Hussein even went to the then US ambassador for permission to invade, and was given the green light (Kuwait was reportedly drilling for oil UNDER the Iraqi/Kuwaiti border--in Iraq territory).

Sure Saddam was a bad guy, but only because he decided to no longer cooperate with his puppet-masters in Washington. They never cared much about his iron-fisted rule, and they were quite happy to cheer him on as he slaughtered Iranians. Oh, and the Kurds were promised support in an uprising, and were abandoned by Bush Snr.

CJ, you should grow up and get informed.

Answer 5

Allow me to start by telling you I've been to Iraq and I was there when we invaded. I work as a 38B Civil Affairs Specialist. MY JOB is to get the feel of the local populace and judge how safe an area is. On the majority, the people of Iraq are not fighting against us. About three weeks after Saddam's people were taken out of power I could *and did in one case* walk the streets of Baghdad without body armor and felt perfectly safe. (Safer, I might add, that I do in a few neighborhoods in Houston) After the Syrians, Iranians, and Jordanians started crossing the border is when things went to he||.

As for the Issue with WMD's check out the Internet some time ... you'll find that "WE" know they have them because "WE" gave them to them! And they were used wrongly on the Kurds!

Answer 6

This has to be one of the most absurd questions on Y/A.

The Americans invaded Iraq to kick out Saddam Hussein. Hussein did indeed have chemical weapons, because he killed 5000 Kurds with them. And he was also pursuing nuclear weapons. Whether he suceeded or not in developing them, is unknown. But one thing is for sure, he was a tyrant, and the Iraqi people are better off without him. Those that were tortured under his regime certainly are not complaining about being free of him.

Are you trying to justify IED's in Iraq, put there by terrorists and insurgents? Are you trying to make some demented comparison of them with Americans? These are not the people of Iraq fighting against American forces, these are terrorists. There is a huge difference. Are you to blind to see that Americans are not the only targets of IED's, but Iraqis also? Has your twisted anti-American agenda blinded you to pure facts?

America is justified in removing a dangerous regime. And if you think we're wrong in doing so.........who cares what you think? There's no injustice in setting people free and attempting to give them a better life.

Grow up, and wise up.

Answer 7

I believe America tries to justify its actions by saying it wanted to help Iraq and eliminate threats of terrorism.

Before the invasion, Iraq was ruled by a cruel dictator who supposedly sought weapons of mass distruction. That same dictator tried to invade a country (countries) in the past.

America is a rational country, controlled by a rational government. Iraq was not, and was believed to be a threat to the peace of several nations.

America is a mostly Christian nation, and such a religion teaches tolerance instead of violence.

Answer 8

While they were here to invade us American Military would bomb the other counrtrys homeland while it was defensless. And nuke the attackers right here on US land. Right after handing out protective gear to politicians and billionaires only.Leaving its own people to die . They would call it a forced sacrifice, or population control or something.

Answer 9

Only in america we created the light bulb the car the tv video games in only america we where the first to the moon only in america we win every war ONLY IN FŪCKING AMERICA dįćk face

Answer 10

The american people won't kidnap foregin nationals and innocent civilans and murder them. Those are the great unjustice and also those are the same people who plant ieds that are used to kill more innocent people.