Is the american invasion and occupation of Iraq moral?

Question

why or why not?

Please give a detailed very logical and irrefutable reason why.

Answer 1

I can't think of any moral basis for random slaughter of innocent people, can you?

Oh, maybe "ethnic cleansing?"

Or "because God told me to?"

Beat me. I think it's one of the most repulsive acts ever committed by America...right up there with giving diseased blankets to American Indians....

It's like blowing up an entire city block and all its occupants to get rid of a drug dealer and claiming the moral high ground for "fighting crime"

Answer 2

There were many reasons given for invading Iraq. I will start with W.M.D.'s. No one can question whether Saddam had them, he used them after the first gulf war, on his own people. The question is, what happened to them? Saddam broke his end of the cease fire agreement from the first gulf war. All alone this one issue makes war both a moral, and ethical reason. It is well documented that Saddam killed more than twice as many of his own people between the two wars than have been killed by the terrorists since the current war broke out. Saddam, by his own admission was sponsoring the family's of terrorists that committed jihad in Israel. Saddam broke at least 17 U.N. resolutions. The U.N. Security Council approved the use of force to remove Saddam. The U.S. congress approved the use of force.......twice. The Butler Report states that while there have been no W.M.D.'s found, all of the evidence points to the fact that Saddam intended to pursue the research, and development of those weapons once the U.N. sanctions were lifted. And to me, the development of a government in Iraq that was freely elected, and friendly to U.S. interests seals the deal.
I believe that this war is not only moral, but was necessary.

Answer 3

I think Americans thought the invasion was helping the Iraqis get rid of a hated dictator (I saw no pictures of people mourning Saddam when they were pulling his statue down.)

The occupation... at first was because once having taken away their security we felt a duty to stay and give them a chance to put something in place.

Lately though, I wonder if we might not just be drawing fire there, and we can't (or shouldn't) stay forever.

We give our government the benefit of the doubt since they have better intel than we do.

Answer 4

It's interesting that so many believe the invasion of Iraq was because of Hussein's brutality. Please remember the reasons we were given before the invasion: Iraq was a threat to us because of the WMDs. And, if the United States feels itself to be the world's police, why is it we've done absolutely nothing to the many more brutal dictators on this planet?

Answer 5

I don't believe this war is moral. The ends do not justify the means.

Whoever said that American had the right to take out a country's entire government system and kill hundreds and thousands of civilians just trying to live their lives is dead wrong. But she is obviously a gung-ho patriot who believes the US government can do no wrong ... more power to her.

And really, anyone who actually still believes that Hussein was working in concert with bin Laden and had access to weapons of mass destruction is diluded.

The problem now is one of pride and guilt. The President is both too proud to admit that this war was a mistake and he probably feels guilty that his actions essentially caused the collapse of an entire country. So, the US remains a presence in Iraq to assuage that guilt.

Answer 6

The American invasion and occupation of Iraq is not moral.

My question to you is...

Would you like my dad to come to YOUR HOUSE and beat your dad because your dad treats you and your mother unjust?

Your answer would be "NO"

Because going to other persons' house without permission is a crime.

The fact is that Saddam got most of his money and weapons from Bush (the father)----They used to be real good friends just like Bin La din.

Good friends turn into real enemies and NOW WHAT?!?---Sending the son to get rid of them...

Answer 7

Here's how I see it - If there was a family two blocks down from where I live, that were being tortured and beaten by some tyrant, I believe, If I have the resources and necessary capability to help them, then I have that obligation to help that family and stop whoever is torturing them!!

Do I not?

If not? Why should I allow it to continue?

Furthermore, If left to continue, that same tyrant would serve a same threat in the future to other families ... Agree?

Answer 8

No. Because it sets up the same base line of failure which we faced in Vietnam.

There was no reason to invade Iraq. It wasn't a threat to us. Saddam never posed a threat to anyone.

But Bush said otherwise and here we are 4.5 years later: Screwed in the *** and sitting in someone else's civil war.

A war of our doing.

Answer 9

Freeing a nation from a harsh dictatorship is always moral and rarely bloodless.

Leaving a nation in the control of a harsh dictatorship is being cold and apathetic.

Answer 10

Is it moral to stop a dictator from mercylessly torturing and murdering thousands of innocent people??