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

2007-11-03 01:54:53 · 16 answers · asked by alphabetsoup2 5 in Politics & Government Politics

There were no wmd's and no harboring of terrorists, well, not until after we invaded anyway. Why can such a noble country choose such rediculously horrid decisions in foreign policy?

2007-11-03 01:58:47 · update #1

Spock, Iranians deposed the Shah, America had nothing to do with it.

2007-11-03 02:02:35 · update #2

16 answers

No, not neutralizing Bin Laden when Clinton had the chance caused more problems.

2007-11-03 02:07:30 · answer #1 · answered by The Voice of Reason 7 · 1 5

Yes, it was. The administration was drawing a line in the sand when the decision was made. But one must be careful to place the line at the correct time and in the correct place and must be certain of the outcome. Bush and his cadre looked no farther than winning the military aspect of the war. The outcome of this was easy to predict because US forces could have taken all the country in 1991. Bush should have had absolute guarantees from Arab countries in the area that they would support a change in regimes and work to integrate a new regime into the body politic of the area. He and his staff were not smart enough to realize the necessity of this and now e are locked in a quandary, damned if we do and damned if we don't do whatever the chosen course.

2007-11-03 02:04:11 · answer #2 · answered by Nightstalker1967 4 · 4 1

nicely, a present day protection force makes use of a /lot/ of petroleum products, fairly in an invasion, so i'm certain it turned right into a significant challenge. Any salary reaped by technique of oil businesses from contracts in Iraq will be miniscule compared to the expenditures of the conflict. the genuine position oil performs is as a strategic source. united statesa. has no selection yet to maintain a good protection force presence contained in the midsection east, to gaurantee it is grant of oil. because, with out that provide, it is protection force would will be regularly undercut. earlier to the 2d Iraq conflict, that presence blanketed Saudi Arabia. it is been moved to Iraq.

2016-10-23 07:53:49 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Yes and its a known fact that Bush was demanding of his cabinet, ten days into his first term, that they find a way to make invading Iraq happen.

That is evidence that it was a war of aggression which is a war crime.

2007-11-04 02:08:05 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I used to think so, until I realized we have gone to war against Iran. In Iraq, we set out to privatize its oil resources.
In the case of Iran, the Cheney-Bush administration is after regime change. I think the Iranian war is our biggest foreign policy blunder. Back in the day we used to just intefere in their politics and install US friendly dictators...not invade and destroy infrastructure.

2007-11-03 02:05:12 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

I am laughing at you alphabet boy...Sadam had WMD and used them on his own people and the Iranians. He also gave aid and comfort to the dearly departed..thanks to a laser guided bomb, Zarqawi prior to 9-11. What fantasy world do you live in. Even your own Bill Clintoon feared Sadam..difference is Bush did something about it.

http://www.warriorsfortruth.com/al-queda-iraq-connection.html

2007-11-03 02:20:25 · answer #6 · answered by I Laugh At Morons 3 · 0 2

It wasn't a mistake. The good ol boys at 'p N a c' wrote a letter pre-9.11 urging they needed a 'New Pearl Harbor' like effect that would give them ability to get in over there. But yeh it was a mistake for this 'tank think' for God will judge us all some day soon.

2007-11-03 02:04:07 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2 3

Yes and the next one will be the bombing of Iran maybe leading to all out chaos in the middle-east.

2007-11-03 02:01:57 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

Well, invading Grenada by Uncle Ronnie's Raiders to 'rescue' medical students who didn't know they needed rescuing ranks up there, but not as bad as this whole Iraqi mess.

2007-11-03 02:03:26 · answer #9 · answered by momatad 4 · 2 2

YES - - the FACT that ALL Vietnam Veterans I know or have met are 100% AGAINST it, speaks volumes of wisdom to me!!

2007-11-03 02:19:12 · answer #10 · answered by BikerChick 7 · 4 1

no

the worst foreign policy mistake, possibly of all American history, was approving the religious overthrow of the Shah of Iran. We and all the rest of the world are still paying for this monumental blunder.

2007-11-03 02:00:26 · answer #11 · answered by Spock (rhp) 7 · 6 4

fedest.com, questions and answers