How can liberals say there was no reason for war?

Question

Saddam Hussein was the modern day Hitler. He murdered thousands of innocent curds, which he hid by way of mass graves, gased whole towns and falsly arrested over 300 people. How can you even say there was no reason? I mean c'mon! If that isnt a reason to go to war I dont know what is!

OH Excuse me! I am sorry Kurds......This coming from the same people who sit on their behind and collect welfare.

Answer 1

amen sis. if saddam wasn't a weapon of mass destruction i don't know what is.

Answer 2

I'm not going to say that I'm for or against the war, but two things concern me about your question. First, if that was the real reason for going to war, why was the war justified to the people under different pretenses? First we were there because Saddam was stockpiling weapons. Then there were no weapons so we really went in because Saddam had ties to Al Qaida. Then those were disproved so we really really went in to liberate the people. Someone is not being completely intellectually honest with the nation.

Now I think Saddam was a terrible guy and I'm glad he's gone. But there are a lot of bad guys in the world right now. What is the litmus test for when we take action? When do we play world policeman and when don't we? Why not go after North Korea or Iran. Why do we not put troops on the group in the Sudan. What's happening now in the Sudan makes Iraq look like the garden of Eden.

Answer 3

Um, I think you mean Kurds. But, really that's the least of the problems with your argument. I agree, what Hussein did to the Kurds was reprehensible. It certainly added to the justification to invade Iraq...in 1991. The Gulf War had crippled the Iraqi military. If Hussein was ever a threat to the wider world, he wasn't by the time GW Bush took office.

Answer 4

I saw a comment, and several like it, that liberals can't recognize evil. Correction, we recognize evil, we're just not going to lable individuals as evil that have a different way of thinking or a different lifestyle. The war on terror had no place in iraq, there were no WMD's like they lied about. If Saddam was a problem it wasn't ours to deal with, that's what the UN is for.


*** Don't insult people answering YOUR question! Just because I don't share your right wing viewpoint doesn't mean I'm sitting on my *** collecting welfare. FYI I have a college education and do research for a large pharmaceutical company- a long ways away from collecting welfare honey!

Answer 5

Your position on the war is certainly understandable. But, Saddam Hussein's treatment of his people wasn't the main issue of the war. It was whether or not Saddam Hussein had nuclear weapons or was connected Al-Quaida. Bush never found concrete evidence proving those claims. Even if Bush did find evidence and even if the war did have relevance to Hussein's treatment of his people, invading the entire country and trying to impose democracy on its people would not be the way to handle it. We should have addressed Saddam Hussein individually. We can't invade or impose democracy on every country that has an evil dictator.

Answer 6

The US knew Saddam Hussein was an evil man when they supported him in the 1980s during the Iran-Iraq war. His tyranny was not the reason the Bush administration launched a pre-emptive war on Iraq. In fact, Bush can't figure out why the US went in there in the first place.

Answer 7

That kind of question almost requires a long explanation, but I'll do my best to keep this short. Social Liberalism seems to emulate (in many of their ideals at least) Soviet Communism. There is a concerted effort to remove any sense of 'evil' or 'wrong'. "He didn't mean to kill thirty people! His mother didn't hug him enough!"

Those of us who have served this nation in some of these countries understand what we're dealing with. Some of us have seen the prisons Hussein kept CHILDREN in to influence their parents to do what he wanted. Or women disfigured by Taliban 'justice'.

The sad fact is, that our country affords so many protections and such an easy, layed-back standard of living, I don't think most people here can even begin to comprehend the evils some of these monsters get away with. I thought we left isolationism behind after World War II? I guess some people are willing to leave their heads in the sand for eternity though.

Answer 8

Kurds...with a K.

He was a bad evil dude... (which we equipped to do those mean awful things, btw, in the 80s). But there are evil dictators and governments all over the world that need to be overthrown. Why Iraq? Could it be because of O.I.L.?

Answer 9

Were any of those activities you listed done against AMERICANS? (in case youre confused, the answers to all these questions will be "No")

Had Saddam Hussein EVER attacked AMERICA?

Had Saddam Hussein ever THREATENED to attack AMERICA?

Has ANY Iraqi citizen ever appealed to the UN for intervention in Iraq? Did the US have UN sanction to invade Iraq?

Do you remember ANOTHER Republican President (hint: His initials are RONALD WILSON REAGAN), who vowed in one of his last speeches in office, that "America would never be an aggressor nation"?

Do you believe the civilian casualties in Iraq, dead from indiscriminate US bombing and napalming prior to the invasion, are grateful the US is there? After 4 years, not only do we not even control half of BAGHDAD, we dont even have the power on in the sectors the US DOES control.

Do you know there are destroyed neighborhoods in Baghdad which STILL have dead Iraqis trapped underneath the rubble?

If the activities you listed above are reasons for one country to invade another, why don't we invade Saudi Arabia? Or Jordan? Great Britain has that Queen, maybe we better invade them too, just to be safe...

It is not our job to force Democracy on other nations. We used to accuse the Communsts of doing that very thing. We need to show everyone else in the world WHY Democracy is the best way to go, by being intelligent, informed voters, who vote with reason and logic, not with fear and xenophobia.

Democracy is the best BECAUSE terrorism can only force weak men (and weak leaders) to change their behaviors. Do you REALLY think wearing paper slippers at the airport foils "terrorism"?
Strong democracies do not change under pressure, they become stronger. Has ANY Republican truthfully stated the US is STRONGER in the last 7 tears? If we are, is this why the US borders are still wide open after 7 years?

And you DO remember Saddm Hussein was publicly elected by over 95% of Iraqi voters? In a VERY public election, televised even on Fox Noise? And before you start hollering "sham election" and "fraud", remember how much that sounded like whining when Democrats did it in 2000...

While there might have been ample reasons for KURDS (not "curds", dear, that's Cottage Cheese) to revolt and at least attempt to overthrow their "duly-elected" Sunni leader, there was absolutely NO reason for US forces to unilaterally invade a sovereign nation, kill its citizens and expect them to accept what is so obviously an occupation by people they consider to be "infidels", ie, the US and the UK.

Something else you may not have heard on Rush or Fox Noise.

Saddam Hussein was one of the very first Middle Eastern leaders to offer sympathy and condolances to the families of victims of the attacks on Sept 11 and before you say, "Im sure he meant THAT", consider this:

Osama bin Laden was pretty well known for his hatred of Saddam Hussein, calling him, on at least oine occasion, an "infidel" which is about as bad a name as one Muslim can call another.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0211-11.htm

As the link states, he felt Hussein was taking Iraq in too "secular" (in other words, too far away from bin Laden's own brand of wacko Muslimism) direction.
Iraq was the ONE country we were CERTAIN had no al Qaeda operatives being supported by the state(PRIOR to invasion anyway, cant say that NOW can we?), as Hussein considered them agitators and either deported them or had them shot.
NONE of the Sept 11 hijackers came from Iraq;
No funds have ever been shown to have been sent from anyone IN Iraq in way connected with the plots of Sept 11;
Statements by Ann Coulter notwithstanding, the 9/11 Commission concluded, beyond a doubt, of Iraq's complete NON involvement in the events of Sept 11 2001;

Answer 10

Easy, many of your facts are off. And currently the US has 14,000 folks detained around the world and in many cases without being formally charged or given a chance to lawfully defend themselves.

Hussein was nothing like Hitler and thankfully almost no one except Stalin has ever come close to that sort of evil. Of course, we never invaded the Soviet Union despite the fact that they certainly met all the criteria that were used to justify this adventure in Iraq.

Honestly the burden of proof lies with you folks who support this madness.

You folks need to keep telling us why it is ok for 5 American families to bury a loved one every day.

Answer 11

1. Another country, its President, its problems, not mine.
2. Who funded Saddam Hussein and armed him in the first place.
3. Why didn't Bush say that instead of the "WMDs" BS.
4. If this is such a great reason for going to war, please sign up.