1) No real WMD (apart from basic defensive battlefield stuff)
2) That it would be an insurgent nightmare, bogged down for 5 years +, and Iraqi political factions never happy with anything.
or... does the oil make up for it all?
2007-11-05 17:05:54 · 15 answers · asked by Narky 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Maybe not, but I still can't figure out why Saddam did not allow the weapons inspectors in his country if he had nothing to hide. He knew what happened in the first Gulf War. He must have known there would be an invasion. I can't believe he would sacrifice his country because of stubborness. All he had to do was let the inspectors do their job, and there would have been no war.
2007-11-05 17:11:44 · answer #1 · answered by Paulus 6 · 5⤊ 0⤋
'Awsom Bill' spouts the same kind of stuff as Doctor Goebbels, the confusion of truth with unrelated facts. I have to agree that it would have been unlikely for Britain to have joined in the war because of massive public opposition and that of the Parliamentary Labour Party. Bush and his political cohorts might have then been deterred but with a person like Bush it's hard to say. Anyone with knowledge of Iraq knew Saddam ran it with an iron fist and thus held the many Iraqi factions together. What the war has done is to release all the disparate parties to fight not only among themselves but with the Coalition Forces and it may well get a lot worse.
How can a person like Bush who in effect dodged the Vietnam War by joining the Texas Air Guard possibly understand what is happening to the America soldiers on the ground ?.
2007-11-05 18:54:49 · answer #2 · answered by Rob Roy 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They did know then what you know now.
But they didn`t care, they had to get the oil at any cost.
The first document covering the invation and colonisation of Iraq was leaked to the press in 1984, and was denied as not being authentic by the US government...
We now know that it was an authentic document.
Based on that fact we should watch out for the attempted invation of Iran, which it promised to happen as soon as a large enough base could be set up in Iraq. Some sourses say this will be in the next three months.
2007-11-06 06:31:54 · answer #3 · answered by Terry M 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They do know now what they knew then. That is NOTHING and knowing nothing they dont know what to do about it.
You do know that all politicians are innately stupid.
The time between the Iraq invasion of Kuwait and the West invasion of Iraq, Saddam was playing politics by first letting the inspectors in, then throwing them out. Then letting them in again and then throwing them out yet again. It was a game he was playing and winning it. The West didn’t like it. So in the true old fashion way of doing things. If you cannot win the game tip the board over.
Both the US and UK governments were prepping the people for months with the weapons of mass destruction story for the excuse they needed to invade.
2007-11-05 17:20:19 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
The Kurds interior the North that have been being gassed and killed via weapons of mass destruction have been greater desirable than happy to have the gasoline guy Saddam Hussein taken from skill, tried and punished via putting. there have been weapons of mass killing in Iraq, Hussein used them, it relatively is how the United international locations knew they have been there. there have been hundreds of fleeing trucks donning all styles of ordinance out of Iraq into Syria the weeks formerly the conflict and with the aid of the 1st few days of it. Many caches of weapons have been got here upon. The United international locations issued the sanctions that u.s. and uk acted upon to do away with the guy killing the Kurdish people as certainly as Hitler killed the Jewish people, as they the two used deadly gasoline.
2016-10-15 05:05:08 · answer #5 · answered by saulsbery 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes.WMD was only an argument to attack Iraq.UK and USA knew well in advance that Iraq had no WMD.It was only a plot to get control over oil resources.
2007-11-06 19:13:14 · answer #6 · answered by leowin1948 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
THE USA AND UK WOULD HAVE STILL INVADED IRAQ FOR THE OIL THERE FULL WILL NO THERE WAS NO THING THERE BUT OIL LOTS OF OIL IF YOU IN YOUR COUNTRY ARE BEING TOLD HOW MUCH YOU ARE GOING TO GET FOR YOUR OIL NOT HOW MUCH YOU AS A COUNTRY NEED TO SELL THE OIL TO SUPPORT YOUR PEOPLE AFTER ALL THE WAR YOU BRING THE OIL MAKES UP FOR ALL THE PEOPLE THAT WERE ARE KILLED NOT FOR THE PEOPLE OF IRAQ BUT FOR THE USA AND THE UK THE OIL MAKE UP FOR IT IN A VERY BIG WAY
2007-11-05 17:27:16 · answer #7 · answered by rani 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Iraq felt it won the 1st war because we didn't invade their country,So I guess it was time to show them who is boss It is an 'insurgent nightmare' seeing how many we are killing Now Mr. Anti American just how much oil is anyone getting from Iraq?
2007-11-05 17:19:24 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Some of "them" DID know then what we all know now. And still "they" pushed it through. The facts were there from the beginning and they were not really all that secret, but they didn't support the existing agenda, so they were suppressed. Even intelligent people who should have known better accepted the official story.
2007-11-05 17:13:01 · answer #9 · answered by surlygurl 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes. Bush and Blair are on a Crusade.
2007-11-05 19:45:20 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋