Survey about the war in Iraq, need 100 answers please?

Question

I am doing a survery I was wondering what everyones take on the Iraq war is.

1. Why do you think that we went to war with Iraq

2. Where did you get the information that lead you believe this, what is your source?

Answer 1

it's not possible to know the answer to either of these questions - americans have not yet been told the truth about why we went to iraq.

we know it had nothing to do with 9/11.

we know it has nothing to do with american security.

we know it has nothing to do with the broader war on terror.

and most of all we know we're not going to get any payback for the 9/11 attacks there...

Answer 2

#1. The reason we went to war with Iraq was that they have the 2ND largest oil reserves in the world. We had to get friendly hands on that oil. The reason We did this is because Saudi Arabia is having a revolution starting with the Muslim Clerics who want the Saud family deposed and they would have a Theocratic government like Iran's. We could not let that happen without Iraq's oil under western control. Having Two Iran's is a deadly proposition, because the Cerics will use the oil riches to wipe out Israel, and cripple the US by terrorists and Nuclear weapons # 2 I am disabled and I read Time ,Newsweek ,2 newspapers and about 6 hours of news every week day. I will go on line to read news stories from CNN and fox news , msnbc. I have lots of Independent sources that I find reliable, such as Front line on PBS, Sky news BBC. And I think that there is credence in what these indpendent sources find. They report on a story and 3days later it hits the regular outlets. I hope I'm wrong about this but I'm afraid that it will happen .

Answer 3

Wouldn't you rather have the truth than a bunch of reasons people "think" we went to war ?

1) 17 broken UN resolutions. Proof that Saddam used WMD's on his own people. Common knowledge around the world that he had WMD's and was planning to continue to use them (democrats, republicans, world leaders all over, including both Clintons.) Satellite footage of the WMD's being moved to Syria. Pages and pages of connections between Saddam and terrorism. On and on and on.

2) Congress meetings that went on while they decided whether to go into Iraq. The democrats have very short memories, but all of the have been saying to attack Saddam from as far back the 1990's. They deny it now, but the footage of democrats, including Hillary, saying we need to take out Saddam are everywhere. A few of the many many sources are given below...

Answer 4

1.) I think we went to war because Saddam was not complying with the sanctions from the UN after the first Gulf War.

2.) The President and Military officials.

Answer 5

Bush the first and Norman Schwarzkopf totally screwed up the ending of the Gulf War. We left Saddam in power with his Republican Guard intact. We had to enforce that stupid NO FLY ZONE. Saddam played fast and loose with the weapons inspectors and we did squat about making him live up to his agreement that ended the Gulf War. The situation was totally stupid and could not go on forever. Clinton did not have the balls to clean up the mess left by Bush the First so it waited until Bush the Second came along and he got stuck trying to clean up the mess..

The SINS of the Fathers ARE visited upon the SONS.....it is poetic justice...

Answer 6

The reasons were: Bush wants to go down in history books as a "Great" president, and had it in for Saddam Hussein for threatening his father.

Cheney wanted Haliburton to rake in the dough (by stealing from the US and from Iraqis by stealing their oil money). Eventuall, I assume, he'll get some pay off for that.

Rumsfeld wanted permanent bases in the Middle East.

Congress went along because they had abdicated their jobs after 9/11 (after singing "God Bless America") -- the Republican-controlled, rubber-stamping Congress believed the lies Bush told them, rather than seeking the truth, which was easily available to anyone who was interested.

No one source, a variety of sources, and my own reasoning.

I've read in a number of places the bit about Bush confiding to a journalist before the 2000 election he wanted to be known as "great" and that being a "war president" would be the best way to ensure that.

I've read in a number of sources that, after 9/11 Bush insisted of his staff that they pin it on Hussein, even though they tried to explain to him that he had had nothing to do with it.

Cheney was CEO of Halliburton, back when it made funny with the books, which he signed off on and later claimed never to have even looked at. This is a matter of public record -- I 've read it lots of places.

Rumsfeld, again, I've read that a lot of places.

These are the explanations that seem most plausible to me, given everything else I know, and the facts surrounding our invasion (and the lies surrounding our invation).

www.juancole.com
www.americablog.com
atrios.blogspot.com
www.talkingpointsmemo.com
www.alternet.org/

are among my sources. Also international news sites, and various commentators.

BTW, your survey won't be sound, as you're not going to get a random sample of any population.

Also, you don't seem to be getting many answers. It's rare to get more than 30 answers (often fewer than 10) on this site.

Answer 7

honestly this made me think of.all the furore relating to the Mosque in manhattan being an insult to individuals by fact of their loss however the yank government intentionally targetted Iraq by fact of 9/11 and it resulted in the deaths of hundreds of hundreds of Muslims.yet all of us comprehend Iraq had no longer something to do with it.I reckon they owe them that Mosque as a vogue of asserting sorry. Nancy:Saddam carried those out for the time of a era whilst he develop into being supported by the U.S. certainly armed by the U.S. actually you need to comprehend that?Iraq develop into an unlawful invasion and an unmitigated disaster and infantrymen have been sent in under fake pretences.There ought to be solid issues that aren't getting stated yet have been the deaths of the form of fantastic form of a sensible cost to pay for u . s . a . of america to get that's foothold in Iraq?u . s . a . of america supported Saddam,set him as much as knock him down and circulate on in.does no longer be the 1st time they have performed that card.

Answer 8

we went to war in iraq to protect the oil there, to protect Israel and to be police the dangerous situations in the Middle East. We went under the guise of fighting terrorism and the false threat of Saddam Hussein. We also have a lucrative budget for Defense and we are trapped in the military industrial complex Eisenhower warned about. Our leaders are literally in the war business.

I don't have a specific source. I came to this conclusion by reading many different news articles, magazines, web sites, and books over the years.

Answer 9

1. Oil
2. Bush gives new reason for Iraq war
Says US must prevent oil fields from falling into hands of terrorists
By Jennifer Loven, Associated Press | August 31, 2005

CORONADO, Calif. -- President Bush answered growing antiwar protests yesterday with a fresh reason for US troops to continue fighting in Iraq: protection of the country's vast oil fields, which he said would otherwise fall under the control of terrorist extremists.

The president, standing against a backdrop of the USS Ronald Reagan, the newest aircraft carrier in the Navy's fleet, said terrorists would be denied their goal of making Iraq a base from which to recruit followers, train them, and finance attacks.

Answer 10

To overthrow the regime of Saddam Hussein.
It is the conclusion I have drawn from all I have read or have seen on TV.