Why didn't liberals care about Iraqi civilians before the war?

Question

Was it because there was nothing in it for them politically?? No political gain in crying for the dead Iraqis? Even now some are still claiming our troops are murdering innocent Iraqi civilians (though they're actually defending themselves against al-Qaeda's foreign insurgents).

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/27000.htm

Answer 1

Sad isn't it... It actually does have everything to do with politics. Bush went in there so all the benefits are null and void and they use childish arguments like "Iraq didn't attack us" or "we were lied to"... So... when Slick Willie was getting "friendly" with a cigar and blue dress... did Bosnia attack us? and why exactly did we go in there?

*edit* Oh, so we need an invitation to take out a dictator who is commiting mass genocide. How does that go...

Dear Mr. Dictator...

Please extend us the invitation to come and take you out and free your people.

Sincerely,

The White House

Now why didn't George think of that one?

Answer 2

I think you'll find that while a lot of people in America will cry that anything and everything is an invasion or violation of their civil liberties and freedom they are the same people that don't give much of a toss for other people in the worlds freedom and liberty.

To some people, it's OK for foreign dictators to kill their own people. So long as the evil evil evil American government isn't allowed to tap their phone if they're suspected terrorists.

Answer 3

California would not have the skill to do it devoid of an act of Congress. Article. IV. section. 3. New States may well be admitted by way of the Congress into this Union; yet no new State would be shaped or erected in the Jurisdiction of the different State; nor any State be shaped by way of the Junction of two or extra States, or aspects of States, devoid of the Consent of the Legislatures of the States worried besides as of the Congress. ~~~ Nor could Texas... inspite of what they could think of.

Answer 4

Why didn't you care about the Iraqi civilian population before you invaded on a pack of lies?

And yes, our soldiers have been murdering innocent Iraqi civilians. And so have Iraqi contractors like Halliburton.

Answer 5

This question smacks of the same hate spewed by conservatives about how liberals do not support our troops. I get so tired of this slanted bias by these closed-minded people. Why don't you understand that the Iraqi civilians, before we invaded their country, were not our chief concern. We were hunting for bin-Laden....remember him? He will never be caught as long as the Bush family continues to do business with the bin-Laden family. That's only one of the things that really bugs liberals about Bush! What part of that don't you understand?

Answer 6

Plenty of liberals expressed concern for civilian casualties before the war. Get your facts straight.

There are honest, respectable conservative commentators. The trouble is that they have been drowned out by Limbaugh and his retarded Dittoheads.

Answer 7

I agree with you heh they dont care about anyone unless they can profit from it but thats more or less every political party and person out there. the things they do to stressed out troops when they accidently kill a non combatant is insane. It must be anear impossible job for our troops to try and tell the difference between one man in a robe with a bomb strapped to his chest and another whos just a little on the heavy side. But support your troops cause with out them forums like this wouldnt exist.

Answer 8

Asked and answered.

Truth: No one thought that idiot president would succeed in going to war with a nation that had NOTHING to do with 9/11.

And hate to burst your bubble, but Conservatives do the same thing. Unless there is something to gain politically, they pay no mind to it. That is why the corporations continue to have the support of conservatives - they can gain money from it.

Answer 9

Why single out liberals? Name one republican politician who ever spoke on behalf of the Iraqi people before they needed a new reason to justify the invasion after the ‘WMD – mushroom cloud – imminent threat’ crap was shown to be a lie.

And, did Rumsfeld care about the Iraqi people when he was cutting deals with Saddam on behalf of the Reagan Administration (providing him with the gas he would use on his own people in 1988); and posing for photo-opts with Hussein?

---------------

Edit --

The head of the CIA recently listed – in order – the sources of the current violence in Iraq.

They are:

1.) the insurgency
2.) sectarian strife
3.) criminality
4.) general anarchy
5.) al-Qaeda

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/georgepacker/2007/07/it-is-what-it-i.html


Al-Qaeda ranks below everyday riff-raff (criminality and general anarchy) as a source of violence in Iraq. I

Answer 10

Do your research:

There was great concern about what was happening to the Kurds under Sadam Husein.