Hey Libs, if Saddam wasn't a terrorist or didn't supported terrorists then why?

Question

did he pay families of suicide bombers $25,000?

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/03/25/1017004766310.html

WMDs were only one of the reasons we went to war with Iraq. Saddam sponsoring terrorism was another.

Kinda funny. Either flat out denial that Saddam was paying terrorist to blow themselves up or insults or a firm belief that WMDs were the one and only reason to go to war. Like I say, funny.

Kelly B, paying the families of a man who runs into a crowded area full of innocent people just going about their daily lives is not the same as paying the family of a fallen soldier. Soldiers try to protect the innocent, suicide bombers prey of them.

"Prey on them" Sorry, mispell.

Nope, not throwing out red herrings. Just asking a question. Red herrings are "War for Oil" questions. I have something to back up the claims I made in my question.

Thank you Dan W. I'm amazed how many people flat out deny he did this. It's kind of scary.

Answer 1

Daniel, questions like this one successfully bring out the dingbats on Yahoo Answers. Let 'em talk; their dingbat answers serve to reveal how much sense your position really does make.

Bruce J. - there are plenty of soundbytes out there from John Kerry and Hillary and the rest of the left-wingers talking about the WMDs Iraq had before we invaded. Look them up. When you find them, I won't be expecting you to post the links. I can tell you, though, from experience that crow tastes like chicken as long as you cook it right.

Answer 2

Maybe Kelly B and Batfood1 should spend some time with some Iraqis , Israelis, or Kurd families that survived Saddam. he received what he deserved and i only wish it would have been sooner. Kelly as a female i cannot believe you have the opinion you have, i pray that you find the strength to stand up for women one day and support that they are just as equal and every resource the U.S. has should protect that.

Answer 3

Well if they were part of Al Quida then it was under Ben Ladin instruction not Saddam. The President and vice president have recently said that 9/11 has nothing to do with Saddam.
Gosh, wish the cons would keep up the the current administration double talk.
I also find it so interesting that blame is put on Clinton or Bush however the blame is never put on the republican god who planted this seeds we are reaping today.

Answer 4

We invaded Iraq for three alleged reasons (note, the Bush Administration changed reasons whenever the one previously given proved false):

1) WMD, based on hand-picked intelligence. Many analyst said the information was wrong;

2) Association between UBL and AQ and Hussein. Again, based on hand-picked intelligence. See Chalabi;

3) Association between Iraq and 911. Again, a Bush Administration manufactured fallacy.

With all the fallacies out there, you want to believe a single open-source article from 2002?

While there be truth to it, we clearly invented reasons that proved false. History will not be kind to us.

Answer 5

What world are you from. Last time I checked left or right we were all Americans first.
I think most Americans agree that he is a Terrorist but he and the Bush family are friends. Actually his family bailed out the Bush family on an oil deal.
Also you might want to look up the word terrorism and read what it is and means to people.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorist

Answer 6

Here's a link that presents a different view of this.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2846365.stm

This was done through the PALF--Palestinian Arab Liberation Front.

In the people's eyes who received this money it is more like death benefits to the families of freedom fighters.
The U.S. gov. pays out death benefits to the families of fallen soldiers.

There isn't any difference.

It's all a matter of perspective and every U.S. citizen doesn't buy into the U.S. governments propaganda against the Arabs or Persians or Muslims as 'evildoers'!!!

Maybe you should put down the kool aid and research WHY our government is trying to demonize these people!!

Answer 7

$25,000.00, eh? I would rather spend that money on hookers in the Red Light District in Amsterdam

Answer 8

Hey neocons,
If George Bush is so tough on terrorists, why has he allowed an affirmed terrorist to remain in the United States?

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?entity=orlando_bosch

Answer 9

Hi. Welcome back to reality.

The premise for invading Iraq wasn't that the country aided terrorists.

IT WAS WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION!!!

I wouldn't mind if Bush stood up and said,'Hey, there's this really bad leader in Iraq that helps terrorism. Let's invade.'

If Bush had done that, the American people would have stood behind him. He didn't do that. He took the coward's way out, and lied to the American people.

Period.

End of story.

http://www.regressiveantidote.net/Articles/What_Every_American_Should_Know_About_Iraq.html

You wrote: W.M.D.'s were only part of the reason for invading.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYI7JXGqd0o

Here's an eyeopener for ya....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5cHBkB_Q6g&mode=related&search=

And here's the Congressional intelligence commitee leader on the subject...

Answer 10

He did not support Al Qaeda - you know that and you are throwing out desperate red herrings to try to justify 6 years of bad government. Too late my friend - you guys are toast in 2008.