So you don't think we should have aided Kuwait when Saddam invaded? We are there because he failed to live up to the agreement he signed when we threw him out of there. You can debate whether it was wise or not but that is the reason...........
Edge, right war. We went in now due to breaking the cease fire from that war. I would not have had a problem dealing with Saddam in another way..........
2007-10-07 03:34:04
·
answer #1
·
answered by Brian 7
·
4⤊
3⤋
If you look at World War 2 we were attacked by Japan! But we invaded Germany too. If you looked at the 1991 U.N. resolution that was imposed on Iraq, we were legally able to attack this country once any of the stipulations were broken. Iraq was also the most feared country in the middle east, at the time. Saddam not only attack Kuwait, but in the 1980's used chemical and biological weapons on Iran. You quote of being directly attacked souinds rather cowardly! If you see someone attacking you neighbor, but in his yard not yours; are you going to sit and watch? Remember in your world, its not your property and not your family.
2007-10-07 10:47:30
·
answer #2
·
answered by harlan b 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
Iraq was no more a threat to our Freedom than Germany was. Hitler and Saddam Hussein were threats to freedom. Neither ever attacked the United States.
The United States, run by Democrats, took four years to get rid of Hitler. The United States, run by Republicans, took two weeks to get rid of Saddam Hussein.
The United States pulled out of Germany .....nope, still there over sixty years later.
The United States pulled out of the Philippines and Cuba just ....well, it is over a hundred years since the Spanish-American war and we have still not pulled out.
But, you think we should pull out of Iraq because..... a Republican was in charge when we went to war and not a Democrat? If a Democrat was in charge when we went to war it is okay to stay?
2007-10-07 10:46:50
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
It was the threat of arms and money going to terrorists. It was not so much that Iraq was the threat but the region is. We had grounds to take out a bad player and deliver a message, we took that opportunity. It would have been very successful if it had not been for the democrats seeing an opportunity to divide the country and seek power. In fact it was until they started doing so.
The threat that the Islamic radicals pose to the world has been growing a very long time and we can not allow it to continue without making it very costly for them to do so.
All you have to do is look at the gang problem this country faces to see a very good mirror of Islamic radicalism.
2007-10-07 10:43:53
·
answer #4
·
answered by Locutus1of1 5
·
3⤊
2⤋
Iraq was never a threat to anyone's "freedom" -- except that of the average Iraqi and the criminal oil sheiks of Kuwait.
While the U.S. doesn't care about the average Iraqi, those Kuwaiti sheiks are allies of American companies, and also, Sadaam was planning to switch oil trading from the dollar to the euro. This was a threat to the American corporations' world supremacy, so the government that those corporations control attacked Iraq. You might say this is the "pre-season" to WW3, when the U.S. will attack its competitors for world domination in Europe and Asia.
You can expect more attacks on Europe ("Those darn French... those darn Germans...") and on China in the U.S. corporate-controlled media as the time for the big war approaches.
2007-10-07 10:45:09
·
answer #5
·
answered by Dont Call Me Dude 7
·
2⤊
3⤋
Where did you hear this. I never heard this about Iraq until your question. We went there for good reasons. Things just did not work out and the Iraq people didn't stand up and help like the Afghans did. Peace
2007-10-07 10:48:42
·
answer #6
·
answered by PARVFAN 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
Here's the thing. We cannot look at the current war without an understanding of the Gulf War. We went in and helped Kuwait, who had been invaded by Hussein. They needed help, being such a small country. In part it was our responsibility to help, as the U.S. played a part years ago in Hussein getting into power in Iraq. He had seemed like a decent thing way back when (a lesser of the evils, if you will), but then his practices turned malicious and the world saw the things he was doing to his own people.
Brian is correct in what he said, by the way.
2007-10-07 10:39:37
·
answer #7
·
answered by steddy voter 6
·
4⤊
3⤋
Iraq never threatened our freedom directly, but by harbouring, funding and training terrorists that has done a terrible crime to our country's Innocent citizens then war is justifiable. However, our country's leadership could not show any evidence that Iraq indeed is in cahoot with the terrorist, who are presently headquartered somewhere in Afganistan and Pakistan.
2007-10-07 10:41:22
·
answer #8
·
answered by alecs 5
·
2⤊
3⤋
Threatened to sell more oil to China, and Russia than us. That is the only threat Iraq was to us.
2007-10-07 10:53:59
·
answer #9
·
answered by masterplumber1975 3
·
4⤊
0⤋
My god where have you been, the Iraqis wanted control of the oil and attack Israel and our government knew about Iran's secrete plans to build WMD to strike Israel our best allies.
2007-10-07 11:02:58
·
answer #10
·
answered by man of ape 6
·
0⤊
0⤋