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

2007-05-16 17:16:13 · 13 answers · asked by MattH 6 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

Even the Republicans acknowledge this.

2007-05-16 17:16:54 · update #1

Why the invasion then?

2007-05-16 17:20:20 · update #2

13 answers

Firstly, why are you brave Republicans/American uber-nationalists too gutless to answer my question on AQ Khan?

Republicans really can't think very well, can they? The Pearl Harbor analogy: firstly, Germany declared war on YOU buddy, saving you the agonising decision of having to go to war against Hitler... and you went on to defeat Japan... you didn't take on Germany INSTEAD of Japan.... and there was the small matter of all those British loans that had to be repayed (the last in 2006), and would have been written off.

Bush didn't say the two were connected but this is a laugh- your average American voter couldn't (apparently) separate the tiny linguistic nuances that separated his heavy insinuation about Iraq... throwing up your hands as saying "Ooh, Bush NEVER meant that" is a big joke when you had the paid Murdoch media blowing the Iraq-9-11 horn, and when Bush was constantly trying to relate the two by linguistic proximity- the end result was, as polls clearly showed, Fox viewers and others connected Saddam to 9-11 in their feeble minds, just like Rove knew they would.

But woe betide any liberal who suggests Republican voters are dopey and think, despite the abundant evidence- and the doublethink involved in your 'Bush never said that' line (but we still have to attack Iraq, right? Oh, of course.)

And yeah, you've really brought so much freedom to Iraq with your hare-brained invasion... and rewarding Wolfie and the other morons into the bargain, just to show Republicans don;t value accountability or responsibility. Now there's a whole collection of religious extremists to vote for ! And what a grand system we have: ONE extra party to vote for, compared to Saddam's 'elections'. And so what if the schools are closed, the power off, you can't go to market without getting killed... now you can vote for Sunni extremists OR Shia extremists... or vote for 'democrats' who are stealing the money and off to Jordan!

And the NEXT time some Republican warmonger will be trying to get an ideologically-motivated invasion happening, all this will be forgotten. You will have finally, once it doesn't matter. admitted Bush and co were fools, but still your next crop of idiots will be given credulous and unquestioning respect, the liberal troublemakers, who will be dead right and truthful, will be subject to name-calling and frenzied attack from your media lap dogs, and we can all go around again....

2007-05-16 20:32:56 · answer #1 · answered by llordlloyd 6 · 3 0

It never ever made sense. Even on the very day that 9/11 happened, it was glaringly obvious to anyone with an active brain that for Saddam to have done it would be pure suicide if it could be tied to him.

Had it actually been Saddam - proveable, knowable - we wouldn't simply have invaded 18 months later - we'd have bombed massively THAT WEEK, much more so than we actually did later on the basis of the false, trumped-up connection.

edit to Bravozulu - That's very much what Bush and Cheney said, all the time. That's what made Bush's later Alfred E. Newman impersonation ("What - I never said THAT!") so ridiculous. What's more, US troops staged in Kuwait for the invasion all carried a photo of the World Trade Center, and when interviewed on news programs they would pull them out, show them to the camera, and very righteously assure the viewers that we were going to Iraq because of 9/11. You think the soldiers made that up or were stupid? No - they were GIVEN those pictures and TOLD that 9/11 was the whole reason for their mission.

edit re: next two answers - TWO answers analogizing the thought process to Germany and Pearl Harbor? Looks like there's a talking-points e-mail being sent around by Heritage or Limbaugh.

2007-05-17 00:21:26 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

because realizing who really was behind 9/11 means you have to accept the truth about the U.S.A. government and their role in 9/11. which then leads to the role they played in many different events in history. THE TRUTH IS ALWAYS HARD TO ACCEPT! once those gates have been open be prepare with a life jacket or something to keep you up float.
the only reason for invasion will be the obvious.......OIL with that comes MONEY with that comes POWER or CONTROL

2007-05-17 01:36:04 · answer #3 · answered by diana m 1 · 3 1

We went to war because of the 17 UN violations, the lack of cooperation of Saddam in regards to the UN inspectors, shooting down planes in the no fly zone. He started this when he invaded Kuwait, the coalition backed him off. He had France, Russia and members of the UN on his payroll to steal money from the oil for food program to build his palaces while his people starved. He gassed his own populations, there have been countless of thousands of Iraqis found in mass graves.

What Did The Democrats Say About Iraq's WMD JANUARY 30, 2004 | Document Location:
http://www.glennbeck.com/news/01302004.s...

2007-05-17 00:25:13 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

lol haha its dumb that they think iraq did 9/11 they didnt and we went to iraq just for the countries oil this is true

2007-05-17 00:31:44 · answer #5 · answered by Arian 3 · 3 0

I never said it did. Germany had nothing to do with the attack on Pearl Harbor, but we went in and took names. Germany is a much better place because of it. So is France, Italy, Poland, England, and a bunch of others.

I'm a republican, so I believe people deserve human rights. The people of Iraq did not have those under Saddam Hussein. They won't have them if we let terrorists take over, either.

Oh, and there were all those people Hussein killed for the purpose of ethnic cleansing. And then there were the people he killed for disagreeing with him, to include his son-in-law. The Iraqi people are allowed to disagree with their current government without fearing for their lives. I call that progress.

2007-05-17 00:23:03 · answer #6 · answered by DOOM 7 · 0 4

well when you have a government that clams that it is going to kill off a lot of people and you, then you start thinking about invading them.

just a quick tally he has killed over 256,000 people!
and that is a reason in its self.

2007-05-17 00:26:34 · answer #7 · answered by tigerbarr1 2 · 0 2

We liberated to stop another 9/11.One with Iraqi chemical weapons.

2007-05-17 00:34:07 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 5

And Germany didn't bomb Pearl Harbor. So why Normandy?

2007-05-17 00:23:06 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

who said it did we invaded because Sodom broke 17 resolutions

2007-05-17 02:29:14 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers