When someone asks an anti-war question, why do cons answer "Remember 9/11" or "Remember WMD"?

Question

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and had no WMD's.

Answer 1

Because they don't understand the reasons a person might be anti-war and resort quoting mindless propaganda that doesn't actually relate to the topic.

Answer 2

The fact is that there were 22 reasons for entering Iraq cited in the resolution to use force in Iraq. Additional reasons were cited in the Iraqi liberation act of 1998. The wmd's were just one reason of many. I suggest you read those two doccuments before you start arguing against why we are there. Also, Al-quida has been proven to be actively engaging our troops in iraq, so we have had an opportunity to thin them out a little by being there. So there is indeed a connection to 9/11. But the simple fact is that Saddam was creating some major problems for us and the rest of the world and it became expedient to remove him.

Answer 3

If this were 1942 and an Anti-War idiot asks an Anti-War question, would it be appropriate to bring up the attack on Pearl Harbor?
Perhaps Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, so, it is an Al Qaeda magnet. The Germans didn't bomb Pearl Harbor either.

Answer 4

I understand the point you are trying to make, however you are purposefully ignoring the points that those answering in that manner are making as well.

Those saying "Remember 9/11" probably are referencing the fact that we did not take the threats given seriously and we suffered for it. Were we to continue not taking threats seriously and a person such as Saddam, who had approximately 10 years of isolation (ie. no UN inspecters), make a weapon to use against us or an ally, after he uses it is too late.

Those saying "Remember WMD" are either referencing Desert Storm/Shield or the actual data that the CIA and other countries assembled that led to the UN resolution, Congress's declaration of war, and our subsequent removal of Saddam from power.

You are correct in saying that Iraq did not directly have anything to do with 9/11, but to say that they had no WMD's is like driving forward using the rear-view mirror.

Answer 5

I said that in a post, Iraq Had nothing to do with 9/11 , Osama Bin Ladin did and he is walking around a free man in Afghanistan (6 years after 9/11) and Bush got side track in his "War for Oil" in Iraq.
This neo/con said Bin Ladin was not important, Iraq was.
If the man that planned 9/11 is not important, The war on Terror was declared as a DIRECT result on his attack on the U.S.
Then there is no war on Terror, IS THERE !!

Answer 6

It isn't about Iraq. That is just a place. It is about terrorism.

You may say that Iraq had nothing to do with terrorism.

Well, other than publicly paying the families of suicide bombers that killed civilians in Israel, actively claiming they were pursuing the creation of WMDs for the destruction of Western countries, I suppose they didn't.

I do take exception when a nation tries to assassinate our President, or when they attack a neighboring country that asks for our help (Kuwait), or attacks us repeatedly during a cease-fire over a period of more than a decade. Iraq did.

We will not tolerate a country that does these things to us, nor should we. If they support terrorist acts, as Iraq did, they are subject, should they abrogate their sovereignty by attacking us or our allies, to being invaded.

We invaded, we won the Iraq war, Saddam is dead.

We are now fighting the never-ending battle against terrorism. Make no mistake, like a war on disease it will never end. It will have quiet periods, but it will not end.

We tried diplomacy. The problem got worse until 9/11 happened. Now we crush it, and when it starts to appear again, we crush it again, just like we do with disease.

Because terrorism isn't something you can wipe out.

However, the alternative, like our daily war on disease, is to stop fighting and let them get stronger...

...and die.

Answer 7

If you knew what you were talking about then you would know that the WMDs, were the least reason for going in. Iraq was a situation going on for 13 years prior to us finally changing out the regime. Learn your history,then come back and ask stupid questions. It's getting rather tiresome repeating this over and over.

Answer 8

Not all Conservatives answer with that, just those of any party affiliation (if any) that mistakenly believe that fighting in Iraq at the cost of thousands of servicemen is somehow preventing domestic terror attacks.

Answer 9

??? and exactly who might these "cons" be that you are referring to??? I don't really believe that Conservatives would give such responses to "an anti-war question" Sounds more like straw men that Leftist use in their talking points.... However I do notice that nearly all "anti-war", Leftist, and many Democrats on Y!A believe that between the US and George Bush cause *all* problems that plague the world....

Answer 10

yes but why did Democrats also vote for it too???

why did Liberals and Democrats keep forgeting that they vote for the war??

why did Liberals and Democrats keep forgeting that Clinton started "Saddam has WMD" in the 90s?