English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

And isn't the fact that we took him out reason enough for us to stay until the government can keep the security?

2007-10-06 11:39:27 · 18 answers · asked by kimmyisahotbabe 5 in Politics & Government Politics

Here's a link, it's a story from 2002. Saddam paid 25,000 to the families of suicide terrorist bombers. It was done out in the open, a member of the Palistinian parliment handed out the checks. I've never heard anyone deny it. The suicide bombers were attacking Israel.

2007-10-06 12:05:40 · update #1

18 answers

There are over a hundred GOOD reasons to have taken Saddam out. Whether this is amongst them, since I see no verification of it anywhere, is questionable.. but irrelevant.
From the uninformed left, you'll get a bunch of anti-Bush sentiment. Disregard them... they are ignorant to the way life was under Saddam. They think they know everything because the media tells them... but the media is slanted and has an agenda to support the Liberals.

So let's look at the truth.
Saddam had WMDs. I know, I know... the Liberals will tell you that he didn't... but considering the US SOLD them to him in the 1980s when he was fighting Iran... we KNOW he had them. When voting to authorize force against Iraq, Mrs. Clinton herself testified that she and Bill were AWARE that Saddam had these weapons and it was imperative he be prevented from using them.
Just prior to the invasion, when the UN was still trying to get permission from Saddam to come investigate and inspect... and the US had given a deadline... a caravan of trucks were seen heading North to Syria from Iraq. Gee... I WONDER what was on those trucks? In order for you to answer that, you have to know a little of the history behind Saddam.
His rise to power was partly due to support from Syria. He was from Northern Iraq originally. He had trust in two things:

1. Syria would hide the weapons for him when the US invaded and keep him from being robbed of them.

2. The US lacked the resolve to see things through. They would invade, find nothing and leave.

Needless to say, Saddam was wrong. He's dead now. The weapons? Well... some of them went to Hezbollah and were fired at Israel... from Lebanon... remember that?
The rest are still in Syria. Israel just raided them and took some material... gee, I wonder where THAT came from?

The Liberals can take their 'illegal war' and 'Bush lied' crap and go sulk in a corner. In the final analysis... when all the proof has been compiled, history will show them for what they are and moveon.org will be a disgraceful episode.

Now, when we SOLD him those weapons, he used some on Iran and used some on his own people. He killed thousands of Kurds... genocide style... no different than what Hitler did with the Jews.
Those moron Liberals quoting the number of soldiers that have died in Iraq... here's one for you... how many soldiers died in ONE DAY taking Normandy? Was the war against Hitler ALSO illegal? Were we unjustified taking out a brutal dictator bent on genocide? Oh, and HOW do you sleep at night? I pray you remain ignorant of how false your rhetoric is.

Now... where do we go from here?
We've removed the dictator. Insurgents are largely sent in from Iran and Syria. We need to do the same thing in Iraq that we need to do here... seal the borders.
Once no one is coming or going, sweep the country of Al Qaeda. Then keep the troops on the borders and inform the Iraqis they have 6 months to get themselves organized. We will help train them and keep Iran and Syria from interfering but we are not going to settle their civil war for them. That is their job.
At the end of their organization time, we withdraw... we have other threats to deal with in Afghanistan and other lands. The Iraqis can have freedom if they want it... but it has to be their decision.

I hope that answers your question.

2007-10-06 12:19:11 · answer #1 · answered by Bryan~ Unapologetic Conservative 3 · 1 1

Kimmy you might want to have a look at this http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656880303867390173 it is clear you are sadly misinformed quit with the goddamn TV you are brainwashed. Its not your fault but I cast blame in the media. Here is a shot of truth, now use that mind instead of letting your Tv use it for you. Its embarrasing that the people of this country havent learned a damn thing about world intervention.
If everyone would go and join the military instead of preaching about other peoples kids policing the world Id feel justified in their sad misinformed questions and answers. If you agree we need to be spending billions over there so huge corporations can get richer while our kids die in a country that is feeling invaded then by all means get your *** over there.

2007-10-06 18:50:01 · answer #2 · answered by stephenmwells 5 · 3 3

you're talking about invading a soverign nation...

pretty much everyone in the middle east has links to this sort of activity... from Saudi, Egypt, Iran, Syria and more have paid off Hamas and Hebollah terrorists if you bother to look much at it... no one really likes Israel over there...

so... no... unless you want to invade the entire middle east...

however I do think the man that led the attack that killed 3,000 Americans, Osama, is worth invading a soverign nation over... maybe two or three...and at the very least is a much better reason than one of many nations paying of Hamas and Hezbollah terrrorists...

EDIT: why do you guys defend Saudi when they have links to these sorts of actions?

EDIT2: oh, another "he moved the weapons to Syria" comment... and they say we believe in conspracy theories?

2007-10-06 19:08:52 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

Yes that was good enough reason but the murder of millions of his own people had a lot to do with it too.

2007-10-06 20:51:37 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Yes, absolutely correct. It's what we conservatives have been saying from day one.
I Cr 13;8a

2007-10-06 21:44:11 · answer #5 · answered by ? 7 · 1 0

No and NO. The ends don't justify the means.
But then you are a neocon and won't understand that.
How about our good friends the Saudis ?
Seems like that is where nearly all the hijackers came from.
Can we take out the Arab Emirates ?

2007-10-06 18:56:52 · answer #6 · answered by planksheer 7 · 2 4

The President of China makes families PAY for bullets used to kill their loved ones. Why not take him out.

Was Saddam worth 600,000 Iraqi and 4000 American lives

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

~~Cheney dosen't think so.

2007-10-06 18:48:55 · answer #7 · answered by Political Sigmund Freud 2 · 3 3

Look silly. Those people live entirely different lives than we do. Even today, years after the invasion most want us out despite Saddam being gone.
Saddam had every right to do whatever the hll he wanted with monies that belonged to his country.
So he paid benefits,
So does the United States.
and no, because you 'took him' out is no reason to stay.
Why?
Because they don't want your tired nosey behinds around anymore.

2007-10-06 18:47:57 · answer #8 · answered by rare2findd 6 · 3 5

Was that our government who said that?

If so, why do you believe it? Based on their dismal record in telling us the truth, I'd say, there is a good chance they made this up as well.

Peace

Jim

.

2007-10-06 18:57:56 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3 3

Who's going to decide when their government is able to actually govern their country? I don't want mr. bush to decide, I don't want mr. cheney to decide and the Iraqi's don't seem to know what they want.
With these issues unresolved, it looks like we're in it for the long haul. I think we need to let Iraq run their own country now.

2007-10-06 18:44:31 · answer #10 · answered by katydid 7 · 7 3

fedest.com, questions and answers