What's the point of the war in Iraq?

Question

I mean Bush keeps sending these armies to Iraq, and they keep geting killed. In the news everyday they say like a person gets killed in Iraq. Is there a good side of this war?

Answer 1

Bush is out of control, he doesn't have a clue as to what he is doing, and he doesn't care. He wants to keep it going until he is out of office, and then he will blame who ever takes his place for not following his silly plan.

Answer 2

You have to remember this is a George Bush
war
And ol" George boy has every intention
of keeping American troops over
there for the next 100 years if he could

Yes you heard me say the next 100 years
and America is the worlds
top police force
And who really cares if men and women die over in
Iraq Bush sure as the hell does not care
who lives and dies
After all this war in Iraq was created by Bush and
yes the Democrats are trying to stop
Bush and everything they can do

Listen to the news coming from Washington and you
will see what I am talking about
George Bush he lies about everything and we cannot
trust our President any longer

Answer 3

The point of the war in Iraq was to create an opportunity for G. W. Bush to be reelected in 2004. Without this war, it's doubtful that his reelection campaign would have been successful. Secondly it's been an effective tool to keep the price of oil elevated, which profits the Carlyle Group. And a third aspect of this war has been it's ability to divert America's attention from the numerous other failures of the Bush administration. All in all it's been an effective tool for George, while managing to kill and wound thousands of Americans and Iraqis.

Answer 4

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.

Answer 5

*Heavy sigh*....You just don't get it do you? The premise of your question makes this clear.

It isn't "the war in Iraq". It is the war against islamic fascism that currently has major military fronts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The real question should be..."What's the point of the war against islamic fascism?"

If you could answer that question without a blanket conclusion that it shouldn't involve iraq or afghanistan, then maybe you would begin to get the idea.

In a war, sometimes the front is dictated by the enemy. As is the case of iraq and afghanistan.

Out of curiosity, where in the world would you CHOOSE to have this war being waged?

Germany? France? China? America? Mexico?.....Where?

Oh, I get it, you don't believe there is a war against islamic fascism do you?

In that case, let us know when you wake up from the dream world you live in.

Answer 6

There is no practical point to the war in Iraq - it was all done for political gain.

Politically well-aligned contractors are getting rich.

It's a huge distraction from other pressing issues of the day - for a few years made Bush untouchable as a "war president" and ensured his re-election.

Oh, and it was a favorite issue of the Israel lobby (many of Bush's senior state and defense staff are open Zionists) - Saddam was a persistent thorn in Israel's side, primarily in its support for Syria, Israel's #1 enemy. Check out this 1996 document written for a Likud campaign - and look who the authors are.
http://www.iasps.org/strat1.htm
"Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq - an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right - as a means of foiling Syria�s regional ambitions."

Iraq also had nothing to do with 9/11. You can check out the 9/11 commission report on this - the primary national sponsors of Al Qaeda were Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Pakistan.

Answer 7

The point was, and still is, control of the second largest oil fields in the world. Never bought into the 'free the Iraqi people' BS. You honestly think the bunch in this current administration gives a rats a$$ about the people of Iraq? Never.

Answer 8

Bush did what the UN wasn't willing too-- enforce the sanctions and resolutions. And ensure that Saddam wouldn't turn into another Hitler. (Then we find out later that the UN along with a few other countries that opposed the war were making deals under the table with Saddam...funny how that works.)

The problem you are describing is the problem with the media's reporting on the war- **they think it's a scoreboard**,
"X of our soldiers dead, Y of the terrorists dead, Z civilians dead. Next up after these commercials- the latest in the Anna Nicole Smith trials"

Answer 9

No their isn't a good side to this war. Anytime you have American blood being spilled in a foreign country its a problem. This is a war we can not win, the enemy is one who will strap a bomb to himself/herself and jump into a area filled with soldiers,civilians,kids, you name it. We went into Iraq and have found ourselves into such a quagmire that we can't find a way out of it. The solution is to bring the troops back home. American lives are worth to much to die for a cause that has no solution.

Answer 10

Saddam prevented UN inspectors from doing their job and violated 17 UN resolutions.
The impotent UN did nothing even though they unanimously resolved to take "STRONG ACTION".
As usual, it became the job of the US to take care of the worlds problems. - The French sure weren't going to do it, Germany and Russia were profiting by sales of weapons to Iraq, so they weren't going to help. If they did, they would be caught red-handed violating UN declarations.

Now, since the totalitarian regime has been extracted, we have to fill the vacuum to maintain some semblance of stability until the newly elected government can maintain control.

Answer 11

There is only one positive aspect of this war.

It should (and I do mean 'should') keep Americans from voting another neo-conservative GOP tool into the office of the president for quite a long time.

People have short memories though - and I have no doubt that we'll be back to this point again sometime in the near future.