2007-07-23 13:11:23 · 26 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Do I believe we invaded for WMDs - Nope.
Do I believe we invaded to give the Iraqi's freedom-Nope
Do I believe we invaded to get rid of Saddam - Nope
Do I believe this war was right - Hell yes
We had to take the fight to these asholes somewhere, we had to establish a large military presence in the middle east to combat this theological war. The war between oppressive Islamic belief and western belief will be waged through the lifetime of our grandchildren and if you believe that the religion of peace would stop before they controlled the entire planet then you are a bigger fool than our President.
2007-07-23 13:22:36 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Yes a lot of them do, although I have never heard any of them give a logical reason reason for it.
Many of the lies are documented at the website, http://www.bushwatch.com/bushlies.htm For me, the lies that require nothing less than impeachment are the lies that led us into war, and the absurdity of the staged aircraft carrier jet landing where Bush stated, "Mission accomplished." By themselves, the Downing Street Memo(s) are evidence enough for impeachment. The downingstreetmemo.com website explains,
The Downing Street "Memo" is actually meeting minutes transcribed during the British Prime Minister's meeting on July 23, 2002. Published by The Sunday Times on May 1, 2005 it was the first hard evidence from within the UK or US governments that exposed the truth behind how the Iraq war began.
2007-07-23 20:14:20 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
Question of going in right or wrong is irrelevant now. The question now is what happens if we leave before the iraqi people are better of than when we over through Saddam? Al Quada will be stronger, There will be killing fields like in Cambodia, The oil fields will be up in flames. The US will be deemed an unreliable allie.
2007-07-23 23:14:37 · answer #3 · answered by viablerenewables 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
i USED to believe it was right .... when I believed the Intelligence that "peachsurprize" writes of ...
but then i used my OWN intelligence and realised that we were being fed bull$hit and misinformation...
peachsurprize ... THAT Intelligence was proven wrong, and it has been stated even by the Bush Admin that it was wrong .. so WHY IN GOD'S NAME are you still sprouting 4yr old MISINFORMATION as a reason to WHY Iraq is STILL right ??
AND have you forgotten that there WERE UN WEAPON inspections STILL going on ( with saddam's approval ) when GWB said he was going in ... THEY wanted more time as they were NOT finding anything ( and we still haven't found anything ).. he complied and we( we being the allied troops supporting GWB) pushed for war....
Sadam was a bad and horrid leader .. but hey THINK ABOUT IT ... has the so-called PEOPLE-SHREDDER been found ..
In war the FIRST causality is truth .. in the lead-up to war the FIRST recruit is Propaganda .. and WE are JUST as likely to use it ( to create hatred and fear) as are out enemies ..
2007-07-24 05:25:47 · answer #4 · answered by ll_jenny_ll here AND I'M BAC 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Alot of time has passed, apparently war is always unpopular, did you forget why we went to war? Intelligence Data was showing Saddam was moving nuclear war head products into Iraq,a nd people were being persecuted.. it was found. We all want the war to end.. but I believe it was the right thing to go in and look, we just found extenuating circumstances when we got there, and its an act of good faith not to leave Iraq until they are ready to support their own army and govt.
I dont know why we have to pay for it though.. Im against that. I dont believe the USA needs to rebuild it, we wouldnt have gone to war if SADDAM complied with the UN inspectors requests to inspect for nuclear arms.
he didnt so we didnt want a dictator with that access, I suppose
2007-07-23 20:17:49 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋
I believe the U N should have been given more time to determine Iraq's status in regards to WMD's.Saddam himself had stopped the genocide against the Kurds many years prior to the war.His sons however still abused their station as Saddam's sons.They needed to dealt with and I believe if given a chance Saddam would have dealt with it rather than war.
2007-07-23 20:20:20 · answer #6 · answered by Dog Tricks 4 · 1⤊ 4⤋
No. Inaccurate intelligence led to a war that should never have happened. Originally it was supposed to be to eradicate 'weapons of mass destruction' then, when there were none, they tried to put a new spin on it as 'liberating' the people of Iraq.
It was none of the US or Britain's concern what was going on in Iraq.
2007-07-23 20:16:04 · answer #7 · answered by garym 2 · 4⤊ 3⤋
Doesn't matter. both Dem's & Repubs voted for it. We must stay the course & help this new democracy survive. Leaving would hurt America not GWB. The USA can not afford to look like quitters OR wimps to our enemies
2007-07-23 20:24:09 · answer #8 · answered by mike h 3 · 1⤊ 3⤋
not even when they were hyping it. When all the news is the same time to disagree. everyone acts like the news is liberal or conservative when push comes to shove they work for the government.
2007-07-23 20:17:17 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Sure ..there are some neo con "arm chair warriors" that still believe US Government LIES.
2007-07-23 20:15:21 · answer #10 · answered by crusher393 1 · 3⤊ 2⤋