Who's most to blame for Iraq war in your opinion?

Question

We've heard millions of reasons why we went. The Bush administration had an agenda to go in even before he was president, yet people still support it. Why? What did Iraq do to us? If we are fighting the "war on terrorism," why aren't we everywhere? There are more terrorist in the world than just Iraq. There are more there now than before the U.S. invasion. Is it that the far-right goes with whatever Bush says? 9/11 wasn't hoped for by him, but it was a good reason to go to Iraq. I think Cheney said, "hey George you wanted to go to Iraq, why not start in Afghanistan then go?" "We can get support from the country because we have it with Afgan war." Bush already said that the next president will have to get the U.S. out. Red flag? Is he admitting a mistake? And for the war supporters, why aren't you helping fight for Iraq's freedom? Because that is what you will be fighting for. The best thing about '08? Bush can't run and Cheney doesn't want to. Thank God. Anybody but Bush.

Even avid Bush lovers have turned from his administration.

Answer 1

GWB, Cheney, Rummy, Wolfowitz and the rest of the neocon gang who sold a pack of lies to the American people. Powell told them...its gonna be like Pottery Barn rules, "you break it...you buy it!"

Answer 2

I dont understand how anyone can place the iraq war invasion on president bush. he followed the law and got the congressional approval to send troops in. I blame congress for the war..
However, i do believe that the handling of the military has been a disaster. The day we sat back and watched the looting take place is the day the war turned sideways. This admin has made many bad choices, and as much as i would like to see peace in iraq, i dont see it for at least another 20 years, unless a dictator takes over.
I think one of the biggest blunders has been the never ending support for rumsfeld. Weve all see the reports and know rumsfeld didnt plan a damn thing after the invasion.
i honestly believe this admin didnt take the war seriously in the beginning. Bush is sitting back watching a slide show joking about not being able to find wmd absolutely shocked me when i saw it. how can someone make jokes about one of the main talking points for war, when our troops are on the battlefield dying? it still makes me sick.
however, saying that the war supporters arent fighting is way over the line. one in 10 people in the age of 17-28 are capable of serving. despite this, the military continues to make its recruiting goals... yes, they had to lower the standards, but that means nothing.. they are still having people sign up.

Answer 3

I would have to say that Bush-Cheney-and Rumdfeld share equal responsibility.

Bush because he's the one who wanted to go into Iraq and because every reason he gave us for going into Iraq has been a lie.

Cheney, due to his ties to Haliburton has probably made
more money from this war than anybody else in the Bush Administration.

Rumsfeld, because he was the SecDef initially and thought it would be a good idea for every Iraqi to be able to keep one firearm. Plus as SecDef he had key role in planning the war.

Lastly, even the CIA and 9/11 comission stated there were no credible links between Iraq and Al Qaeda. All 3 of them and others knew this too, yet nobody said anything. Sadly in a post 9/11 world its considered treason to dissent so our elected officials voted to support a war they all knew was wrong,

Answer 4

you may not placed the blame on occasion politics. i think of their are unknown aspects that are in charge for those wars. The French have been getting bored with Viet Nam and the u . s . a . comfortably got here alongside to snatch the baton. that doesn't sound like occasion politics. As for the democrats having a mandate, that's not from the wide-unfold public yet of their own making. A mandate is an overpowering majority helping an argument. Bush is having a similar problem. His polls are way down yet nonetheless treats the Iraq conflict like a mandate. although now and lower back there are negative aspects the wide-unfold public isn't attentive to. yet we shouldn't element palms and blame human beings to even the score.

Answer 5

I agree with you on that one. I'm not even a U.S. citizen, but I can tell you, as someone that travels extensively, most of the world has a really negative view towards Americans because of mistakes made that cost innocent lives.
You're right, there's terrorism everywhere in the world, so why doesn't the U.S. fight elsewhere, who knows. I think that G.B. just wants a foot in the door in the Middle East so he can get a hold of their oil and other stuff that will benefit the U.S. Who cares who has to die in the process. You always see on the news how many U.S. soldiers die, but it's not so publicized how many other innocent Iraqis die as well. What makes one life worth more than another?

Anyway, no matter who George Bush is and how powerful he thinks he is, he is after all human, and he WILL get his day of judgment, just like any other person.

Answer 6

Iraq is a handy location as a "Police Station" right smack dab in the middle of most of the world's remaining oil (Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Kuwait). The American economy is (currently) based on using fossil fuels to build suburbia, then drive around it, buying burgers. Bush has gotta get that oil, or it all comes crashing down. The next guy will probly do the same, but even if they leave Iraq, it won't change anything back home.

Answer 7

I would blame anybody that supports it, it is total mistake!!

and youre right, there is terrorism everywhere, but I dont see oil everywhere and I dont see targetable muslims everywhere

I was about to say Bush but there are still a lot of people that supports him in this site, Im getting rated neg all the time by the idiots who think Im in the states.

Answer 8

The Bush Gang

Answer 9

BUSH -- He wanted action and in his pitiful excuse for a brain, war meant getting the bad guys and punishing them for being mean and hateful. Quite naturally, he didn't think of the consequences of his actions, and therefore, had no clue of the quagmire into which he was entering when he decided to do this. I blame Bush entirely for this shortsighted, stupid, neverending war we're involved in. He went against Powell, the UN, and many other nations to do this. I just wish he could be made to suffer like he's made countless families suffer by killing their friends and family members. He obviously never picked up a History book while at Yale. The cocaine fried the few brain cells he was born with.

Answer 10

The iraqis wanted saddam out, he was the worst dictator, and yes he should have gone, but now the first world countries are trying to force democracy onto a country that doesnt want it, and we wonder why they arent participating in renewing their country after such devistation.

Its like us trying to go from democracy to a communism or dictatorship or whatever.... its not going to happen, and we woundnt let go of it without a fight. Like them.

They are the source of their own problems and solutions i think. I know there is more to it that that..... but they cant be helped if they dont want to be helped, and they dont want it....

Answer 11

RUMSFELD or that dummy rummy or rummy dummy as I like to call him.
The guy is a drunk. Add Cheney to the mix and then you have 2 assholes and an idiot (Bush).
Powell was the only sane one in the bunch. We all know what happened to him after voicing his opinions.

I caution you however. Be careful, "anybody but Bush" thinking is dangerous. There are worse idiot asshole evangelicals out there!