I think I understand your question. Firstly, there's always hindsight. We know a lot of things now that we didn't know then, so it's really easy to sit in judgment of the war now and say that we made mistakes. Secondly, you're right that we can't know what would have happened if we hadn't gone to war, but on the same note, we shouldn't wage a war because maybes and what ifs.
2007-07-14 20:20:33
·
answer #1
·
answered by TheOrange Evil 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
America armed Husein then we went to war with bad intelligence. Bush should step up and say the ball stops here and step down so should Cheney. Husein kept the war lords at bay now they are the ones causing the civil war in a very fragile area They have been fighting for thousands of years, how can we step in and bring Peace and democracy? This will never happen in a hundred years.
2007-07-15 04:38:35
·
answer #2
·
answered by lonetraveler 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
We can say war is bad when the consequences of war are hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths. That isn't saying that war is better or worse than any other option. It's just saying that war is bad.
In any choice, you can second guess what might have happened if you chose a different path. Such guesswork is usually pointless and a waste of time.
2007-07-15 03:23:08
·
answer #3
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
We will never know all the destruction we have probably prevented by going in early.
History would tell us if neville Chamberlain had gone in early against Hitler instead of placating him, there wouls have been far less destruction and deaths.
History will tell us years fron now the wisdom of our actions.
True Patriot....In case you hadn't noticed, many more children and Civilians were slaughtered prior to our involvement. Check out the mass graves and WMD's used on their own people.
True Patriot...Who helped Finance Germany and Italy in the early 1930's? The Chinese prior to Korea? Who admitted China to the WTO without restrictions?
Answer:
1. FDR
2. FDR.
3. Clinton.
4. Who allowed Iran to hold our Hostages for 444 days, while giving them money? Carter.
Pick up a book, and put down your blind hate...
2007-07-15 04:02:06
·
answer #4
·
answered by Ken C 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
Do you do everything in life according to the fears you have?
I hope not.
Do you understand that a lot of innocent Iraqis were killed? Do you understand that some of them were children?
Are you really only concerned about your own hide? You obviously aren't concerned about "some people", just your own hide.
How sad. No wonder so many other countries hate us now.
***Ken C. Who gave Saddam those weapons? Huh? Bush's Daddy and Raygun. Who should have to answer for that? We armed Saddam (well actually it was you Republicans that armed him) and then we (you Republicans AGAIN) who had to go to all this trouble to knock him down. You and YOUR PARTY need to start taking responsibility for your actions. If you all hated Saddam so much, why'd you give him the weapons he used to slaughter his people?
2007-07-15 03:56:57
·
answer #5
·
answered by Cerulean 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
Because people dieing is bad? You automatically assume we only go to war for defensive reasons.
2007-07-15 03:21:36
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
because to start the war is always bad,but you don't know if join it is bad when the war's already start
2007-07-15 03:30:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by tutu t 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
the alternative to war was lower gas prices, smaller profits for exxon and saudi arabia and haliburton. the taliban would still be in power in afgan but the real terrorist work out of s arabia anyway, and we've done nothing to them. saddam would be in power, sanctions dropped, oil flowing, he'd be way to happy to ruin it all by f****** with the usa. terrorist risk would be about the same. gas would cost $2.00/gal.
2007-07-15 03:27:04
·
answer #8
·
answered by bdbbdb 3
·
2⤊
1⤋
Maybe we would've found Bin Laden by now...
2007-07-15 03:30:41
·
answer #9
·
answered by jerseygyrrl 3
·
2⤊
1⤋