Target practice
2007-04-16 11:24:43
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
When 9/11 happened, the UN was already involved in monitoring Iraq's weaponry... because of the history of Saddam Hussein trying to invade Kuwait and intelligence that said he had weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear and chemical weapons. After 9/11 he stopped allowing the UN weapons inspectors into Iraq and failed to respond to many UN orders to allow them in. Also, Iraq was a known terrorist training ground. So, although sources say Al Queda and Iraq weren't friendly, there were ties to Syrian and Iranian terrorism. When you add to all that the fact that Saddam Hussein terrorrized his own people, used his army to kill whole villages of his own people... Well, it made sense to go in to locate and neutralize the weaponry, to free the Iraqi people from the crazy man that was Saddam Hussein.
Today the Iraqi's have a free, voting democracy. 12 million of them voted in the last election, knowing that their vote would mean a continued US presence in Iraq.
We're there now to secure the peace for the peaceful Iraqi's. We're fighting insurgents... terrorrists from Syria and Iran and those Iraqis who don't agree with the new government. Most of the deaths happening now are caused by terrorist suicide bombings and roadside bombs planted by the insurgents.
When you think about it, if we went to Iraq for oil, why is the price of gas so high now? If our economy is based on supply and demand, then the huge increase in supply from Iraq would certainly have brought gas prices down, wouldn't it??
Also, since there, we have built hospitals and schools, rebuilt mosques (churches) for the Iraqi people to use. Their students are in school again, their women are able to vote in free elections and get medical care for their children. They have electicity and roads in villages where there was none before. Funny, you don't hear THAT on CNN...
2007-04-16 18:35:26
·
answer #2
·
answered by Amy S 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
First of all, I don't think sixth graders are "stupid," and neither do many others. If you are in sixth grade, and you're asking these questions, I think you're probably wayyy ahead of many of your classmates.
Secondly, you are asking the very same questions that many Americans -- young and old -- are asking. At first, the issue was that Saddam Hussein was planning to use weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) in a bid to wage war against the U.S.A. and our allies.
That, of course, was never -- NEVER -- proven. Then, the issue became, "well Saddam is a bad man (and he really was), who has killed many of his own countrymen, so we should get him out of there and help the Iraqis." And that seems to be the story that many supporters are sticking with, because the first story -- about the WMDs -- was a lie.
2007-04-16 18:29:30
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
3⤋
going to Iraq has been part of a long campaign which started soon after Iraq attacked Iran. one reason was that Iraq was ruled by a tyrant and was a threat to peace. of course he is not the only threat but one we can take care of quick and easy. another reason is that, ever since gulf war when Iraq attacked Kuwait the Kurds in the north have been helping us out a lot in defeating Saddam Hussein and in doing so they have suffered greatly. so we are aslo protecting an allie. another reason would have to be that Mesopotamia is the source of all the trouble in middle east. by neutralizing this area we can have better peace in middle east, including the Palestinian and Israeli wars. however the threat still remains, Iran and syria, especially Iran will not stop until it has a total influence over middle east and turn them all into anti westerns. we had a choice, wait untill they get stronger in which case it will be a lot harder to defeat them or stop them before it turns into a world war. i assure you, this trouble is not cause or started by USA, it was started by Iran, ever since this Islamic government has come to power from its first day they burned the american flag and have acted against all we stand for. we have been forced into a war we didnt have a choice, just as we cant afford to just run away from it. in my opinion this isnt as bad as the media is saying it is. its just life, people have always suffered from war. life is hard.
i also like to point out that, saddam Hussain didnt burn villages of his own people, he burned villages of the Kurds for 1, being allies with USA and 2 for not being arabs. this issue is always missunderstood or missinterprated. the Kurds may be part of Iraq but they have never wanted to be nor chose to be nor had any rights within these country. they were forced and lets admit it the British ****** up real good by not giving them an indpendant state of thier own. by linking the Kurds with arabs and Iranians these nations grew strong enough to couse us trouble, otherwise they would have been fighting Kurds now.
2007-04-16 18:59:54
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
We went to Iraq because of the oil, and because a lot of lies were fabricated to convince people of a danger that didn't exist. Iraq had it's internal problems for many years and nobody felt gung-ho to rush in before and save people from each other. These tribal wars have been going on for a thousand years, so we aren't making a dent in their beliefs. We need to leave as soon as possible, as requested by the Iraq government, as well as almost 70% of us. Best wishes
2007-04-16 18:32:45
·
answer #5
·
answered by tylernmi 4
·
1⤊
2⤋
Oil - Iraq has the 3rd largest reserves of oil in the world. Saddam was also paying suicide bombers families if a family member killed Israels.
2007-04-16 18:30:20
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Because Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and was a mass murdering dictator. Don't believe it, look up his chemical attack on the kurds. Not to mention he had more than ample time to destroy or move his stockpile with all the repeated warnings he got from the UN.
Don't listen to the socialist-liberal-democrat sympathiizers either. Their own politicians voted to give Bush the authority to go to war.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=FNgaVtVaiJE
2007-04-16 18:27:41
·
answer #7
·
answered by Bunz 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
If you will go to the congressional record and look up the bill authorizing the use of force in Iraq, it is all there in pretty clear language and you will also be able to see who voted for this.
That is the best way, quit listening to socialist partisans on Y!A
2007-04-16 18:26:27
·
answer #8
·
answered by rmagedon 6
·
3⤊
1⤋
Many reasons, one of the main ones is that false information arose that Iraq had WMDs (Weapons of Mass Destruction). We went over there to do something about that and remove saddam Hussein from power. We are currently still there for many, but highly controversial reasons.
2007-04-16 18:26:30
·
answer #9
·
answered by rosslambert 4
·
2⤊
2⤋
We went back to Iraq because the U.N. cease fire agreement was not being upheld -- which was supposed to have ended the first gulf war (AKA Desert Storm),
2007-04-16 18:30:16
·
answer #10
·
answered by Doc 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
free the people of Iraq and restore law and order and to place a democracy government
2007-04-16 18:31:25
·
answer #11
·
answered by L 4
·
1⤊
1⤋