seeing as the our intelligence assesment have now determined that at the precise time we went into Iraq, Iran halted it's nuclear program??? seems bush got it right and prevented a much larger problem from emerging..
2007-12-04 21:46:11 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
chris..."WMB'S"????? lol...did you mean weapons of mass bestruction???? lol...oh, and saddam killed "HUNDREDS" of people,...really??? hundreds? what? two hundred?? three hundred?? dude, oh, sorry, "MATE"...oy...he gassed a quarter million kurds!!!!
2007-12-04 22:20:39 · update #1
Um...... look, I'm not an American, so I don't know what information your are not being told over there.... let me put it this way.... The US put Sadaam in power, thus destroying an existing democracy. Now that all the rubbish about WMB's and links to Osama has been exposed as stuff the US basically made up, the reason has become Sadaam being an evil dictator. No doubt he was- he killed HUNDREDS of people. Of course the United Nations Economic Sactions, pushed through by the very democratic US right of veto, were resposible for between 200 000 and 500 000 deaths depending on whose figures you use, and then theirs the thousands dead in the war.....
As for "liberation".... yeah, the Iraq people are now liberated to be shot in the streets and starve to death instead of live in what was a once moderate thriving economy (Before the US helped Saddam overthrow it of course)
You SERIOUSLY ask whether US in Iraq has prevented WW3?????
Mate, it's not over yet- it may well have caused it!!!!!
2007-12-04 22:04:36 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
The intelligence actually suggests that Iran halted this "secret weapons program" about six months after the invasion of Iraq. That also happened to be the time that the European Union reached an agreement with Iran saying that they would cease nuclear enrichment.
Do you really think that Iran would attack America? They'd have nothing to gain from it, and their country would be all but destroyed soon thereafter. Countries want to get the bomb because it means political leverage, they don't want to use it for an unprovoked attack.
2007-12-04 22:13:44 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No. It only embedded the US into a long and costly war it is not going to win. More could have been accomplished by diplomacy with Iran. Also the USA's toppling of Saddam is just another invasion and occupation of yet another empire seeking to acquire permanent access to Middle Eastern oil.
2007-12-04 21:58:04 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Why wage war and make everything complicated? Bush got everything wrong-period. And besides, who was saying anything about Iran's nuclear program anyway? The way I hear it, Bush got into war with Iraq over 'alleged' nuclear weapons...which were never found. The real solution would have been being peaceful about it- and Bush is too much of a war freak to get anything right!
2007-12-04 21:52:42 · answer #4 · answered by Kapes 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
"In other words, the UN agency (International Atomic Energy Agency) found no evidence that the nuclear weapons program the NIE now claims was in operation until 2003 ever existed."
US intelligence report shows war drive against Iran based on lies
By Bill Van Auken
5 December 2007
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/dec2007/nie-d05.shtml
--------------------------------------
Iran: Why does Bush invoke the threat of World War III?
By Alex Lantier
30 November 2007
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/nov2007/iran-n30.shtml
2007-12-04 21:58:47 · answer #5 · answered by Mencken 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It very well could have. But if anyone out there really thinks Iran doesn't still have a nuclear program they are crazy. It is a known fact that they are still enriching uranium. I would tend to lean more towards Israel's intelligence which is not as convinced.
2007-12-04 21:53:25 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
If that is what you are selling now I think that will lose every elected office down to the county road commissioner in East Pawtuckee, KS.
2007-12-04 22:13:41 · answer #7 · answered by sSuper critic 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely! It prevented world war three, four and five and some analysts even believe six and seven!
The world can´t be thankful enough !
2007-12-05 23:31:07 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
probably, but the whining from the pelosi/reid regime camp wont stop. the successfull way to keep al qaeda in check is to learn how to MUZZLE the liberal extremists so people who understand what terrorism is and know that unilateral surrender...aka harry reid... is not the answer can solve the problem.
2007-12-04 21:54:49 · answer #9 · answered by koalatcomics 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋