Should the invasion of Iraq even be considered a "war"?

Answer 1

it should have been an international police action to
catch osama. there is no war on terror, terror is no country.

the invasion of iran though was a war, despite the missing
thrill, more like between punchball bob and muhamad ali.

and iran was pleased. what's democracy they asked,
(a knowledge lost there, after usa overthrew their gov
- which was elected indeed- and installed the schah)

advisors told them 'heyyyy - it means the schiites lead"
so in teheran the only ones celebrated the fooled troops
who came underequipped, with no orders for securing
treasure, estate or the full weapon storages which now
are supplying all the lunatics who maintain chaos only.

in berlin, the soldiers brought food, repaired waterpumps
hence were indeed celebrated - uhm after a while at least. :)

Answer 2

The invasion has to be called something and 'Peace Keeping Mission' doesn't seem to fit. What should we call it? How about: An economic necessity, experimental missal exchange, a population reduction effort, a show of force, A desert proposal al fin, ethnic cleansing, an oily slick stick, an about face?

Answer 3

Come on, bioid, get a grip. Your purchasing into all of this nonsense like it have been actual - Bush seems to be between the few on Capital Hill who isn't risking us of a's protection and destiny for his or her own political objectives. evaluate the main ardent supporters of a "decrease and run" coverage - Hagel, Biden, Clinton, et al - and then evaluate that those idiots all have presidential objectives for 2008. accident? i think of not. Non binding resolutions, troop re-deployment, investment cuts and all the different proposed rhetoric serves no purpose different than to embolden the enemy via dividing our dedication, and you comprehend it.

Answer 4

Dictionary.com defines war as:

war

1.a conflict carried on by force of arms, as between nations or between parties within a nation; warfare, as by land, sea, or air.

So yes.

Edit: To BlackStallion, there has not been a declaration of war against Iraq.
The last time the U.S.A. declared war was against Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania on June 5, 1942.
All other U.S.A. actions are, Congress authorised Military engagements.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_war
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_war_by_the_United_States

Answer 5

Read the U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section, Item 11:

"The Congress shall have the power to....
declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal,
and make rules concerning captures on land and water."

This military action in Iraq is NOT a constitutional, legal, justifiable, moral war because Congress did not declare 'war' (and hasn't since World War II). This is a military skirmish initiated by George W. Bush because his family had a personal vendetta against Saddam Hussein ever since Desert Storm when George H.W. Bush was criticized, ridiculed and humiliated for 'not finishing the job' and ousting Hussein at that time (even George W. Bush has used the phrase 'finishing the job' in reference to this insane 'war'). There were only two other reasons we went to 'war' against another sovereign nation that in no way threatened, provoked or attacked the United States:
1. Dick Cheney wanted all that OIL swimming underneath Iraq's sands so he and his Exxon-Mobil buddies could get richer and richer and richer feeding America's addiction to cheap, easily-accessible foreign OIL;
2. Ever since World War II, the giant U.S. military-industrial complex [which Eisenhower warned us about] recognized how profitable 'war' could be. So the politicians were all bought up, pricey lobbyists were hired, and special interest groups were formed to promote and encourage more 'war'. Thus, we were engaged in the Korean Conflict; the Cuban Missile Crisis; the Cold War; Vietnam and Desert Storm all so that McDonnell-Douglass, Sikorsky, Lockheed-Martin and other government contractors could boost their sagging profits from years of peace time. Add to that the two 'newcomers' to the government's war trough: the Carlyle Group and Halliburton BOTH have direct ties to the Bush-Cheney White House.
This is NOT a 'war'. This is a military police action initiated all for the sake of OIL and WAR PROFITEERING. The lives of 675,000 Iraqis and 3,800 U.S. soldiers mean nothing to the wealthy elitists, industrialists and power brokers who want to become wealthier and more powerful at any cost. -RKO- 09/03/07

Answer 6

it is a war by every ones standards I think.

Hey Truthseeker. I guess you are right, it was a sovereign dictatorship...and Saddam was a peace loving hippie wasn't he.

and it was legal by the U.N. standards according to the agreement to allow UN inspectors in or face invasion. It had signatures on it and everything...

not to say that we should go by the letter of the law when deciding to invade people, but you get the point.

Answer 7

Let's see, people fought (but not so much the Iraq's), people died, there is constant fighting going on------yea, I think it should be considered a war.

Tell the guy coming home that lost a buddie or two that it's not a war. Tell the guy coming home missing an arm or a leg that it's not a war.

Why are you hung up on symatics?

Answer 8

No--You just called it for what it is--An Invasion. Prime Minister Al-Maliki is looking out for his own skin which is why nothing will change until we leave that country. What a tragedy, while our bravest are being killed Maliki stall for more time and we continue to fall for this malarkey.

Answer 9

If you don't think it is a war...grab up a protest sign and
march the streets of Baghdad...while you are doing this,
I will sit here and watch CNN to see how long it will take
the insurgents to have a beheading party at your expense!

Answer 10

Hi.Ive read the other letters and one thing is missing from thier decadent speeches."We did declare war but only where terrorism lives and broods.