First off, make the statement that Operation Iraqi Freedom isn't a war. Congress never declared war.
-Saddam had murdered 100,000+ of his own civilians with nerve gas. (Genocide)
-The UN has posed, I THINK, 17 (not sure on the exact number) of sanctions on his regime and he wasn't complying with any of them.
-He stopped letting US and UN weapon inspectors come and inspect his country after word had gotten out that he might be obtaining uranium.
-Don't rely on the WMD scare for the debate, get into how he treated his people, how many people he murdered, wars that he had started, and threats he made against the US like "whipping them off the face of the Earth"
-Basically, we invaded Iraq to take down Saddam, which the US did. They went in, disbanded his Military easily, found him and let the Iraqis deal with him how they wanted (he went to court and was put to death), and are now trying to stabilize the country.
You could also go into how we are protecting ourselves by fighting them over there. Al-Queda and other terrorist/anti-Americans are in Iraq now fighting against our Troops. Which might sound bad, but while they are fighting us there, they can't hit us again here in America. Also, it doesn't hurt having all of your enemies flock to a single location, it's easier to fight them.
You should google some stuff about Democrats like John Kerry and Hillary Clinton saying that there are WMD in Iraq, there are abunch of web sites that have these. They are from around the time the conflict in Iraq started and go back to the late 90s.
Good Luck.
2007-12-01 08:06:27
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
4⤋
The same reason why Iran and the Arabs will give the western the long anticipated "RISING SHOWDOWN" if necessary. They and the Muslim's world are ready for you guys just like what they did to you guys with this Iraq's war. They knew for a fact you guys wanted theirs oil without having to pay a damn penny. They don't think so. They had the u.s military inside their territory and make sure the u.s pay before a barrel of oil even been shipped out of their lands. They've got the u.s military good. They(u.s) thought or even predicted a clean quick sweep or an in and out type of war, but in reality they had you guys run for your money with all the cost of war, lives, resources and a big mess. They were waiting for you guys to step into theirs traps and sure enough you guys did.
Be careful to open more battlefields. They do have nukes and hidden WMD and they do not hesitate to use them on you guys since a lot of troops are inside theirs turf.
2007-12-01 08:33:50
·
answer #2
·
answered by Dongfeng!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
i do no longer see how some human beings say confident. in spite of in case you opt to anticipate that no different us of a is in contact,Israel can no longer invade a brilliant us of a alongside with Iraq incredibly that Iraq had a solid military . And as somebody suggested,the U. S. succeeded in invading Iraq because of the fact the Shias,who have been mistreated by using Saddam,did no longer fairly need to combat the human beings. otherwise,the U. S. could have had many extra casualties or maybe could desire to have failed the invasion.
2016-10-18 12:27:32
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
No problem, they way I look at the situation is very pro-war. We saw Saddam Hussein as a threat for several different reasons. First, by his harboring, funding, and supplying of terrorists to attack American, British, and other U.N. targets, they was an act of war. He also was a threat to Israel, which you could say is one of the only US friendly nations in the middle east. Not to mention that he wanted to be world citizens and free people from a harsh, brutal dictator. Finally, I see the war as a defensive measure. By attacking terrorists in Iraq, we can limit and hopefully eliminate al-Quida operations worldwide. I have noticed that since 9-11 there has not been a major terrorist attack on U.S. soil. This is mainly due to our fighting in Iraq combined with the good work of the CIA and our counter-terror ops. Hope this helps.
2007-12-01 08:57:52
·
answer #4
·
answered by #1MetsFan 3
·
2⤊
2⤋
The real answer is what people do not want to hear, the truth is it is really all about big money politics .defence contracts at the cost of tax payers and the American public has no right to say or do anything about it while they are being robed or being brainwashed about how much good is being done in another country when America is getting weaker by the minute as company's go to other countries for workers,the education level drops, medical program sucks , the hole is getting deeper,i think soon Americans will have to think of immigrating to another country for the land of opportunity or we stop all the waste-full spending by the thief's in power
2007-12-01 09:33:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by jp patches 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
You know the answer is simple, you could have googled it and got much better.
WMD. Saddam Gave up a list of what he claimed to have. Then he started giving lists of what he was destroying.
The lists didn't match up.There had been no inspectors in Iraq for roughly 4 years 98 to 02. We really couldn't get an accurate picture of what was going on with his programs.
As it turned out we never found the stockpiles that he had claimed to have but never claimed to have destroyed. But we did find testing facilities for missiles that he wasn't supposed to have, We found dozens of dual use factories that could be converted back to munitions plants in no time.
We found plans and biological strains hidden in scientists homes.
Add this to the fact that many other countries believed that Saddam did indeed have these Weapons.
2007-12-01 08:14:16
·
answer #6
·
answered by SFC_Ollie 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
Credible suspicion, enhanced by Saddam's actions, that he possessed biological weapons and would pursue nuclear weapons. We already knew he would use them.
See if you can get a hold of Valerie Plame's husband's original report. I don't remember his name. This is the whole 'yellow cake' thing.
Potential of Saddam providing a real modern state in which to train terrorists.
We stayed for the opportunity to build a democracy in the middle of the Middle East, with the potential to destabilize Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia.
2007-12-01 08:17:29
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
That pretty much defeats the purpose of a debate, doesn't it?
You'll only accept one side and not the other.
The reason why we invaded Iraq is because Bush and company believed it would be a lot easier to take out an impotent dictator than go after the mastermind whom did 9-11.
2007-12-01 08:32:12
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
First, to kill Saddam
Second, so we increase out presence in the Middle East so Iran won't come and take over the whole region
2007-12-01 08:24:44
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
The reason is greed and power. Be up front. Say the US only cares about this. This is why it happened.
2007-12-01 14:59:34
·
answer #10
·
answered by Hidup 1
·
0⤊
1⤋