English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I mean liberating a people from a dictator is something Clinton would loved to have done. (Although GW screwed this one all up) but the reasoning should be right up a libs proverbial ally. Now if we had nuked them and stole thier oil, that would have been conservative.

2007-04-28 03:53:19 · 3 answers · asked by popeyethesadist 5 in Politics & Government Military

3 answers

But liberating something isn't always the right thing to do.
As is the case with the Iraq war, removing Saddam created more problems than solve it.

No one ever asked the Iraqis if they want to be liberated when Saddam was around.
What we know now, TODAY, is that the Iraqis DO NOT want American forces to stay in Iraq because they feel that life has not turned for the better after Saddam was captured and hanged.

The Iraqis do not feel liberated.
War is very real around them.
Death is very real around them.
How are they liberated?
What are they are liberty to do when there is bombing and explosions everywhere!

2007-04-28 03:57:05 · answer #1 · answered by Magma H 6 · 0 0

On the contrary, Iraq is the most conservative war ever.
This unconstitutional, illegal war started for only three really 'lame' reasons:
1) The Bush family had a personal vendetta against Saddam Hussein ever since the days of Desert Storm when George H.W. Bush was ridiculed, criticized and humiliated for not 'finishing the job' and ousting Hussein at that time;
2) Cheney and his Exxon-Mobil buddies want all that OIL swimming underneath Iraq's sands so they can richer and richer and richer feeding America's addiction to cheap, easily-accessible OIL;
3) Ever since World War II, the giant U.S. military-industrial complex recognized how profitable 'war' could be. So they bought up all the politicians, hired pricey lobbyists, and formed special interest groups to encourage and promote 'war'. Thus, the U.S. has been involved in the Korean Conflict; the Cuban Missile Crisis; the Cold War; Vietnam; and Desert Storm. Another 'war' was necessary to boost the profits of companies such as McDonnell-Douglass; Halliburton; the Carlyle Group; Lockheed-Martin; Sikorsky; General Motors and other war profiteers.
This 'war' was a result of typically conservative greed and corruption. If we truly plan on leaving once we've brought democracy to Iraq, WHY is the U.S. building the largest embassy in the world on a 104-acre site in downtown Baghdad, overlooking the 'new' Iraqi puppet government installed by the Bush administration? We will be in Iraq until the last drop of OIL is sucked out of its sands. The conservatives will also invade Iran soon - for the very same reason: OIL and WAR PROFITS.
Iraq has nothing to do with 'liberating' a people...it's all about greed, corruption, profit, and power. George W. Bush and his crowd (including the most corrupt, arrogant, greedy, incompetent U.S. Congress in history that went along with the Bush folly) should all be tried for crimes against humanity in an international tribunal. If convicted, they should all hang, just as they hanged Hussein. These people are evil cretins. -RKO- 04/28/07

2007-04-28 11:08:07 · answer #2 · answered by -RKO- 7 · 0 0

Haha, that's pretty funny... and true. Now the libs think that the Iraqis have been liberated, so it doesnt matter that there are insurgents killing innocent people every day, and that's our military's fault. It's pretty screwed up really.

2007-04-28 11:37:02 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers