War on Iraq

Why does everyone have their own ideas about why the US had really attacked Iraq? Some say that it was for Israel. Others say it was for the oil. Still others say it was because of what happened here in New York. If Bin Laden and Sadam Hussain were found, captured and brought to UN justice at that time, would the war have stopped?

I'll always believe it was because one man wanted to avenge the attempted murder of his father before he left office. I don't think there was any other viable reason. This is why I think there are so many theories. WMD doesn't work. They weren't there. But there had to be some "national security" excuse to pull it off.

People just use Iraq as political bully tactics these days. It's easier to hate on Iraq than to defend the current poor leadership.

And sometimes the only way to improve things is to just go over there, and eliminate the problem. In certain instances, justice in a courtroom or the UN, isn't going to solve the problem; a slap on the hand and saying "Bad boy! Now let's rehabilitate you", doesn't always cut it, and for the greater good, sometimes you just have to put sympathy and "humanitarianism" aside and get rid of the Hitlers, Mussolini's, Husseins, and all the other people like them. Some people in this world are just beyond what humanity can do to help them, save them, whatever--let God deal with them after they're gone.

I can't really support the war; however, I admit to being GLAD that we took Hussein down.

I think I'm the only person who watched the TV interview with Hussein when he was in prison (can't remember if it was "60 Minutes" ~ I assume it was), and I was in shock by the things he said. While I tend to agree that the attack on Iraq was revenge, Hussein took responsibility on national TV for purposely lying about the WMDs because he "didn't think Bush would take him seriously". I'm not joking. Those may not be his exact words but it's very close. And he had no reason to lie.

Back before we invaded...when Saddam Hussein was constantly thumbing his nose at Western sanctions, I couldn't help thinking of the appeasement Europe made to Hitler right up to 9/1/39. Maybe if the British and French and been in a position to bitch slap the fucker as soon as Germany started to re-arm there woulldn't have been a WWII. Maybe. So in that regard I can't say I was against the bitch slapping we gave to Saddam Hussein but only because the Democrats and Barrack Obama led me to believe he was a much greater threat than he was.

Still, I wish I could have seen the look on his face when he found out the invasion had begun. "Are you fucking me?! They really think I've got The Bomb??!!"

CeCe wrote:I'll always believe it was because one man wanted to avenge the attempted murder of his father before he left office. I don't think there was any other viable reason. This is why I think there are so many theories. WMD doesn't work. They weren't there. But there had to be some "national security" excuse to pull it off.

Hussein after his expected posturijg was actually starting to acquiesce to the UN demands to search for the non-existent weapons but Duh'bya wanted a useless war.

I think the best way to prevent these "bad guys" from arising is to not support them to begin with. We supported Saddam during the Iraq/Iran war after the Iranian revolution which overthrew the US's good friend the Shah. We did the same with afghanistan... we financed and trained them against Russia.

I think it was alan who mentioned german re-armorment after WWI. The treaty of versailles humiliated germany and took away their military completely. In part, we caused the void which hitler filled by bolstering german pride after such a humiliating defeat. We need to stop manipulating rulers/countries/people. It is one thing to step in where innocent people are being slaughtered... even idi amin was harbored and protected by our good friends saudi arabia... so it makes me wonder, just HOW do we decide who to befriend and who to attack???

Someone recently posted a topic about keeping your enemies close. The US foreign policy often mimics another adage, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." That may be true to an extent while you both have that common enemy but after they're defeated we're usually left dealing with the blowback.

Alan Smithee wrote: they're defeated we're usually left dealing with the blowback.

Well said my man! and that blowback costs us billions of dollars while the country sinks deeper into a depression!

I believe the US got into the Iraq war due to the age old struggle between father and son, the son trying to prove he was the better man. Frankly all he proved was that he was a dolt and that his father was smarter. I was against that war and Canadians yelled so loudly that for once the government had to listed and we stayed out of that misbegotten war. Now the republican candidate has said he wants to attack Iran, and Canada has a government that will not listen to the people and will really really want to go play with the big boys!

The 2003 invasion of Iraq was a DISTRACTION. It was basically an attempt by the Bush administration to capitalize on the patriotic spirit of the US after 9/11 by "inventing" a convenient target in which the US could seek revenge over, and present the appearance of protecting the US.

After failing to find Osama Bin Laden for the first two years after 9/11, Bush diverted the countries attention from him to Saddam Hussein by creating the idea of the "axis of evil" (Iraq, Iran and N. Korea) as rouge nations that either posses or are seeking weapons of mass destruction. The Bush administration tried to tie Hussein with Bin Laden (suggesting that Iraq harbors Al Qaeda terrorists, which was also BS) so that we could focusing on the LEAST threatening of the three axis of evil countries. This gave Bush the opportunity to finish what his father started in 1991. The fact that there was bad blood between the Hussein's and the Bush's no doubt added fuel to the fire, and the fact that the US could exploit Iraqi oil after we conquered it made it clear that "Iraq" must somehow be painted as the most serious threat to the US (even though it really wasn't). That's when Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney invented the "WMD's" supposedly in Iraq's hands. This was the excuse used to galvanize the American public into supporting the Iraq invasion.

So while the country has now basically forgotten about Osama Bin Laden (the real threat) and all the American troops dying in Afghanistan for a minute, everyone turned their attention to trying to find Saddam Hussein. When we couldn't find him, Bush declared "major combat operations" in Iraq over in a BS speech designed to rally the American public after the failure to find EITHER Bin Laden or Hussein. Then when people started to question the validity of the WMD claims, we suddenly find Saddam Hussein and attempt to bring him to "justice" and rally the American public once again (even though neither Hussein nor Iraq had anything to do with 9/11).

Basically, the entire Iraq war was a very expensive and bloody smokescreen used to distract the American public from the Bush administration's failure to find Osama Bin Laden! Unfortunately, not only was the Iraq war unnecessary, but it weakened US military combat operations by forcing us to fight two wars at the same time and expend time, resources and human lives to a campaign that served no strategic purpose. It depleted our budget surplus and turned it into a deficit and it also damaged national security in that by taking out Saddam Hussein, the Ayatollah is now free to extend his influence against the United States towards Muslims throughout the region. Saddam Hussein as "horrible" as he was, was the only person who kept Iran at bay! Iraq did not harbor Bin Laden or any other terrorists because Hussein considered them as well as Iran a threat. Saddam Hussein executed terrorist in his country and his military (which was one of the largest in the world before we destroyed it) was a significant deterrent to the spread of radical Islam from Iran to the neighboring countries. Taking out Saddam Hussein was tactically one of the biggest mistakes the US has ever made and we are worse off as a country because of it. It made the war on terror longer, more expensive, and much more difficult to actually win than it would have been otherwise.