How come the U.S. government doesn't need to provide concrete evidence to wage wars against another country?

Question

please the phrase 'to fight evil...to fight for freedom' is all rhetoric. The real world is not a comic book.

I'm sick of people saying support our troops when they are not even sure what they are fighting for. If you really want to support our troops then you should make sure that they are fighting for a real cause and not just going out there to die.

Where is the concrete evidence and reasons that we are still in Iraq? The only thing Bush will say is 'because we're spreading freedom....we're fighting evil.' NO REAL SUBSTANCE! SO since our troops and our freedom is such a big issue then...how come the U.S. government doesn't need to provide concrete evidence to wage wars against another country?

Answer 1

We're fighting for cheap gas and to control what little oil is left so WE can control the world...that's not worth my sons life? It's all about OIL and GAS...even Afghanistan Chevron is building a Gas pipeline across north Afghanistan...a pipeline they have had on paper since the 1970's!

9/11 was an INSIDE JOB to set the wheels in motion to take over the middle east and to put trillions into the pockets of the Military-Industrial complex. Think it is a coincidence that America has had nearly constant warfare since the Federal Reserve Act of 1913?

Answer 2

Well once upon a time, back when the Constitution was created the rules for going to war were very clear:

war is a decision to be made exclusively by the representatives of the people -- the Congress. Only Congress is authorized to declare war, raise and support armies, provide and maintain a navy, and make the rules for these armed forces. - From Article I, ¤ 8, clauses 11-16

But over the years it has been rattled and dismantled, with a war powers clause, more powers are afforded to the executive branch then ever.

Bush stated before he even got approval from congress that he could still attack with or without their approval by using the terms of the Gulf War Resolution and the congressional resolution approving military acts against terrorism. There really was no stopping this man!

But we shouldn't have been worried, becuase we were still a member of the UN, and USUALLY we would seek their approval, because a war with Iraq without UN approval is a violation of international law......but no not this time.

Bush wanted war immediately, congress and the UN convinced him to do inspections. Now I am going to use a quote here, just because I find it ridiculous:

"After months of looking, U.N. inspectors did not find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. President Bush then ordered the U.S. military to attack Iraq because Iraq had failed to prove that it did not have weapons of mass destruction."------what? Apperently HE DIDN"T EVEN NEED EVIDENCE! Insanity--I am with you on this one all the way. And i think the HIGHEST form of support you can give our troops is to fight for them....while they fight fo us.

None the less, he did get the approval from congress, so he went. And as for now, all congress can do is control the 'purse strings', he needs money to keep it going, and if you have been catching the news lately, congress is finally stepping to the plate and attempting to get our troops home. Thank God!!!!!

Answer 3

No country has ever needed to provide evidence to anyone to pursue its own interests in whichever way it finds expedient, up to and including the waging of war. The world isn't as much of an "international community" as well-wishers present it. International courts, summits, the UN, etc. -- it's all a bunch of huey, useless bureaucracies whose only function is to provide jobs for plutocrats.

You want to know why the US is in Iraq? Because the US can. That's only reason. If Iraq could, it would be in the US -- and it wouldn't "provide evidence" to anyone either.

That's the way the world has always worked, and will continue to work for the foreseeable future.

P.S.: The more interesting question is why so many folks on these boards are so eager to kill the messenger.

Answer 4

It makes me very sad that you don't find "fighting evil" and "spreading freedom" to be anything more than rhetoric. You even say that it is nothing of substance.

To give you a short explanation, one that you may think is wrong or silly, the government wants to begin the reform of the Middle East into a group of more peaceful, economically and politically viable nation-states. It is a complex process with a complex array of resons, and boiling them down to a phrase or singular reason is not only impossible, it's childish and pedantic.

Oil, or rather the economic stability of the global economy, is one reason in the sense that it is why the area is more important and vital to America and the world's interests. Oil in the sense that Bush wants to steal their oil for his "buddies" or whatever rhetoric the left chooses to invent is also a childish thought. Oil is important because it's important to the country, not just to Bush.

We also were demonstrating that there would be consequences to being a global "bad actor" in the post-9/11 era. Saddam funded suicide bombers in Israel and elsewhere abroad. Iraq made contacts with Al Queda operatives and probably would have hammered out some sort of operational partnership sooner rather than later. Once sanctions were to be lifted by the UN, it dosen't take one with a large IQ to figure out that the weapons programmes would have started right back up, seeing as how there was money budgeted for it and the researchers were still on the government payroll.

Attempting to boil down the cause and reasoning to our foreign policy will always generate a simplistic and skewed view of our acts. Ridiculing that boiled down phrase really accomplishes nothing but exposure of your own biases and ignorance.

Answer 5

Let's assume this question is inspired by ad nauseam discussions on torture. What bothers me is not the unfairness of torture. What bothers me is that we have allowed the President to give himself the sole power of determining who is or is not an "enemy combatant" and then withholding Constitutional rights from that person. Torture is a part of this much larger, scarier problem. The departures from operating pursuant to our Constitution have become more and more blatant, and U.S. citizens, especially conservatives, have stood by and approved of this each step of the way. James Madison wrote, "If tyranny and oppression come to this land, it will be under the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."

Answer 6

Well, I hope you didn't forget 9-11 yet, lest we forget that Iraq has been liberated from an evil dictator and we are not at war with Iraq, we are fighting terrorists in Iraq.
God Bless America our Troops and Commander in Chief !!!

Answer 7

The Commander Guy has got to do something, so he started a war to keep his cool, suave persona intact.

Here's the real reason - politics. It's no longer the will of the people, it's the will of big money in Washington D.C. By the time a person get elected to Congress, they are so corrupted they can't even recall what an honest citizen does for a living. The public sheep is too busy watching the stock market, watching television, watching Hilton's antics, and downloading porn that they just keep checking the same box come election day.
All I can say is at least there are elections, so eventually some of them screw up bad enough to get replaced - although the replacer is just another career con artist politician waiting to plunge their hand into a lobbyist pocket.

Answer 8

Do you honestly in your heart believe your own words? The the US and 30 some other countries who were part of the coalition went into Iraq without any evidence because we thought "what the hell, why not?". You need to do some growing up and while you are at it, I would do a little more research on a topic before you rant on about something that obviously you know nothing about.

Answer 9

Because we're America and no one can tell us no. Are the other nerds going to tell a bully that he can't push people? No, too much intimidation. We might just be the next Babylon.

BTW, 9/11 had nothing to do with Iraq. The claimed links between Saddam and al Qaida were proven false.

Answer 10

How come people can ask questions on Y! without having a brain. If Bush was to come out and lay a ton of "concrete" evidence to show what we are doing in Iraq is for the good of the country, Libtards like you would deny it and ask for more evidence.