Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why, to stop his rampant gathering of massive stockpiles of WMD, of course. Also, 9/11 changed everything. Also, he was like buddies with Al Queda. And finally, because just asking that question makes you a terrorist-coddling liberal who hates America and why can't you just support the troops? Besides, we'll be greeted as liberators.
Sorry, that was a 2003 flashback, there.
We had to remove SH because invading Iraq had been high on the PNAC wishlist since forever, the GWB administration was a who's who of PNAC and the US public was willing to let their justified anger over 9/11 be redirected. Hey, opportunity.
Actually, President Clinton fired missiles into Iraq and cited Saddam's providing material and technical support to bin Laden. When bin Laden's group attacked us on 9/11, that connection was one of the reasons for targeting Iraq. The WMD argument came from various nations' intelligence information. Prior to the actual invasion of Iraq, Saddam was sending big rigs into Syria. Some intelligence agencies say these rigs contained the chemical weapons. Fast forward nearly ten years and you have reports of Syria using chemical weapons on it's people fighting to remove the existing government.
Actually, President Clinton fired missiles into Iraq and cited Saddam's providing material and technical support to bin Laden. When bin Laden's group attacked us on 9/11, that connection was one of the reasons for targeting Iraq. The WMD argument came from various nations' intelligence information. Prior to the actual invasion of Iraq, Saddam was sending big rigs into Syria. Some intelligence agencies say these rigs contained the chemical weapons. Fast forward nearly ten years and you have reports of Syria using chemical weapons on it's people fighting to remove the existing government.
Actually, President Clinton fired missiles into Iraq and cited Saddam's providing material and technical support to bin Laden. When bin Laden's group attacked us on 9/11, that connection was one of the reasons for targeting Iraq. The WMD argument came from various nations' intelligence information. Prior to the actual invasion of Iraq, Saddam was sending big rigs into Syria. Some intelligence agencies say these rigs contained the chemical weapons. Fast forward nearly ten years and you have reports of Syria using chemical weapons on it's people fighting to remove the existing government.
What's your point? The US is guilty too then-we have no moral ground to stand on and invading another country for crimes we committed is beyond hypocrisy.
Actually, President Clinton fired missiles into Iraq and cited Saddam's providing material and technical support to bin Laden. When bin Laden's group attacked us on 9/11, that connection was one of the reasons for targeting Iraq. The WMD argument came from various nations' intelligence information. Prior to the actual invasion of Iraq, Saddam was sending big rigs into Syria. Some intelligence agencies say these rigs contained the chemical weapons. Fast forward nearly ten years and you have reports of Syria using chemical weapons on it's people fighting to remove the existing government.
So the war was justified, it just failed to achieve its central objective? Good intentions, incompetently carried out?
Incidentally, the left-wing peacenik nutjobs at the CIA concluded that there were no WMD, nor programs, to be found.
Senator Jay Rockefeller (W.Va.): “There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons.”
Senator Carl Levin (Mich.): “The war against terrorism will not be finished as long as (Saddam Hussein) is in power.”
Senate Minority leader Harry Reid (Nev.): “Saddam Hussein, in effect, has thumbed his nose at the world community. And I think that the president's approaching this in the right fashion.”
Sure he was an evil corrupt dictator but he was no actual threat to us and he kept the Middle East in order with an iron fist.
1. He kept Iraq "in order" by killing anyone who he didn't like
2. His sons raped any woman they wished
3. Saddam worked with Al Queda to attach America
4. Saddam sent his "weapons of mass destruction" over the border into Syria...truck load after truck load which was caught on satellite.
5. If Saddam wanted anything that belonged to anyone else he just took it and killed the owner if there were any objection.
That's just for starters
Saddam was a threat to America and Iraq was the best place to start to stop the terrorist threat. We won that war until the idiot currently in the White House interfered and lost everything we had won with his stupid and ignorant withdrawal.
Before bush II ever got into the white house, there was a plan for the us to gain control of mideastern oil and therefore the world. The wtc destruction was just the excuse they were waiting for.
The plan was courtesy of cheney and wolfowitz and others, some of whom have their names on the report, but there's at least one other layer behind them. The report is still online somewhere - the title was "the new american century" or something like that.
Seems to me that bush II was chosen to be the figurehead for this plan, because of his own natural inclinations and his family's deep connections, over three generations, to the oil business, in the us and in the mideast.
Even today, a game of chess (or risk?) is being played, and the game is not transparent to the american people. It might be thought that the cheney/wolfowitz/others plan has failed, but I don't believe that for a second. It is not going as smoothly as they expected it to, but the objective hasn't changed, and they are still working it. The election of a president who is reluctant to engage in war has slowed them down, but it hasn't stopped them.
Sure he was an evil corrupt dictator but he was no actual threat to us and he kept the Middle East in order with an iron fist.
Look up the order Bill Clinton signed for regime change in Iraq then look up the bill giving Bush the authority to carry out the regime change.
As you can see, if you ever come back, you will get all sorts of "opinions", some even are serious and others are just kids mouthing off,on here from people who have NEVER read them.
After reading them come back and discuss.l
Last edited by Quick Enough; 02-15-2015 at 07:05 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
