2007-08-31 17:05:11 · 14 answers · asked by soperson 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Bush is just trying to finish what his father should have finished in 1991. I have friends who are in the military that say the only reason we left Saddam in power back in 1991 was because alot of Iraq's neighboring countries were buying our weapons to protect themselves from him.
If we would have removed him from power they would've been less likely to keep buying them. Coming from people who served over there, I believe it. Why do you think so many soldiers are frustrated with what they are doing over there? We were supposed to be there to eliminate Saddam and he has been dead for awhile now.
We should be in Afghanistan looking for Bin Laden. He admitted to planning and executing 9-11. I highly recommend to anyone wondering why we aren't going after Bin Laden to watch Farenheit 9-11. It shows the business ties that the Bush family has to the Bin Ladens.
2007-08-31 17:19:52 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Invading any country demonstrates resolve and being resolute signals strength. Of course it is better to invade the right country rather than the wrong one, but honest people can disagree on which is which. The point is made in either event.
Personally, I do not like war. Foreign affairs can be influenced more effectively with diplomatic and economic threats and promises, foreign aid and covert operations.
As for stimulating the economy, public works projects are more effective than wars because when you are done, you have a road or a park rather than some expensive missile fragments, a burned out foreign capital and a bunch of body-bags.
2007-09-01 00:35:43 · answer #2 · answered by BruceN 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Can you tell us all which country was the right one to invade?
I think we invaded for strategic reasons to outflank Iran from both sides.
By setting up a military presence in the region we no longer have to rely on the fickle politics of Saudi Arabia and the other sometimes friendlies in the middle east.
2007-09-01 00:10:13 · answer #3 · answered by krollohare2 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, in the sense that it shows our military might, and the fact that our military is capable of inflicting great destruction and carnage -- whether justified or not.
Whether a country is the "right" one to invade or not is based on our defined goals and objectives -- it has nothing to do with whether the invasion is effective, or whether the troops are capable of showing US military strength in that venue.
2007-09-01 00:11:16 · answer #4 · answered by coragryph 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Depends on how strong the wrong country is.
2007-09-01 00:10:58 · answer #5 · answered by Dick V 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
What country did we invade now,I missed something.
2007-09-01 00:09:16 · answer #6 · answered by one10soldier 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yea they should of stayed in Mexico instead of invading us>>?They have made us stronger look how we defeated the amnesty bill>>Know there being deported>>?USA right>>?
2007-09-01 00:12:53 · answer #7 · answered by 45 auto 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
In the words of a not-so-bright poster, yes. I'm tired of neo-cons and their low brow take on the world. It should be illegal for people with an eighth grade comprehension to have any input into matters concerning national security. Even in YA politics.
2007-09-01 00:10:30 · answer #8 · answered by Chi Guy 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
It made America weaker, but it's had the opposite effect on Cheney's Cayman Island bank accounts.
2007-09-01 00:09:17 · answer #9 · answered by obl_alive_and_well 4 · 4⤊ 1⤋
War is good for the economy. It creates jobs and streamlines our population count to allow more positions to be available.
2007-09-01 00:17:10 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋