Why are we fighting in Iraq?

[RomanSoldier]

Facts:

Iraq had no connection to the 9/11 attacks

No WMD found in Iraq.

Iraq had no connection to Al Qaeda

Osama Bin Laden detested Saddam Hussein

Iraq never threatened to attack the US

Iraq was never connected to any terroritst activity that threatened the US

Iraq never posed any real threat of any kind to the US

So why are we there?

 

[Lignoba]

Iran

 

[shinbits]

Facts:

Iraq had no connection to the 9/11 attacks

No WMD found in Iraq.

Iraq had no connection to Al Qaeda

Osama Bin Laden detested Saddam Hussein

Iraq never threatened to attack the US

Iraq was never connected to any terroritst activity that threatened the US

Iraq never posed any real threat of any kind to the US

So why are we there?

Fact: EVERYONE, Democrat and Republican, including John Kerry, thought the opposite of the facts you posted.

So we are we still there? To finish what we started. It would be more wrong to just back out now.

 

[ScottishJohn]

Fact: EVERYONE, Democrat and Republican, including John Kerry, thought the opposite of the facts you posted.

Everyone? No. That is not a fact.

So we are we still there? To finish what we started. It would be more wrong to just back out now.

This I can agree with.

 

[momalle1]

Fact: EVERYONE, Democrat and Republican, including John Kerry, thought the opposite of the facts you posted.

No, the only consensus was WMD's with the exception of Powell and Rice.

So we are we still there? To finish what we started. It would be more wrong to just back out now.

True, but I think the OP wants to know why you think we went in the first place.

Military supremecy.

 

[Interesting2me]

I always thought it was 9/11, you have to protect your 'Home Field', no matter what. People have been taking pot shots at our country ever since Viet Nam from within & friom without. If we wait a few years after all the spin, & other garbage has played out, maybe "The History Channel" [if it's still around & American] will let us know the whole story if not the truth!

Add our nation being conceived as a "cash cow" who likes being "milked" [almost dry now] on a whim by whosoever & you'll find more than a little truth in Isaiah 1:1-7, 18-20. Echad/God's covenant has always been with 'A Chosen People', from Noah & His, to Abraham & Sarah's seed, which now includes "His Church" [not America], who accepts His Blessings, but ignore historical consequences of disregarding His warnings!

 

[Billnew]

Why?

To remove an unpredictable leader that had ties to terrorists, that had WMDs(used them on his own people)
A leader that raped and killed his own people on a whim.

Iraq did have minimal ties to Alqueda(not anymore then any other terrorist group. But still had ties)

"Iraq never threatened the U.S.?" Seemed almost a weekly occurance, with the breaking of the no-fly zone,
and radar locks on ouor planes. These are an act of war.

A free Iraq will give us a base in the area, and freedom will spread through the region. When people see what freedom offers they leave the dictators. Those that take everythng from thier people and allow them just enough to survive.

 

[JustOneWay]

Iran

Agreed

We went into Iraq so America could build an Embassy as large as The Vatican City.

 

[peepnklown]

So why are we there?

New World Order!

It would be more wrong to just back out now.

It’s never wrong to admit a mistake (Iraq) and correct it (leave).

To remove an unpredictable leader that had ties to terrorists

The United States placed him into power and Iraq has no ties to terrorists.
WMDs were never found but, of course since the United States supplied Iraq with WMDs I am sure the government was sure we’d find them, opps.

Iraq did have minimal ties to Alqueda

This is incorrect but, if you want to talk about ties to this terrorists group, our good friends over at Saudi Arabia has huge ties.

These are an act of war.

No, at most this would be a job for the UN.

A free Iraq will give us a base in the area, and freedom will spread through the region.

That is called Imperialism.

 

[ballfan]

Facts:

Iraq had no connection to the 9/11 attacks

That we know of.

No WMD found in Iraq.

But hardly something we could be sure of before the war.

Iraq had no connection to Al Qaeda

Again before the war we couldn't be sure of that and in fact we have found out since there were contacts between the two.

Osama Bin Laden detested Saddam Hussein

Strange bedfellows but not all that an uncommon occurence. The enemy of my enemy is often quite useful. Even if I don't like him.

Iraq never threatened to attack the US

Iraq agreed to a no fly, for them, zone. We were to patrol it. They attacked us there every chance they got.

Iraq was never connected to any terroritst activity that threatened the US

Iraq never posed any real threat of any kind to the US

Both shortsighted views. The first world war was caused by an assassination. It almost seems too simple doesn't it. Iraq is more complicated. Saddam was involved in terrorism. We know that. Real heavily in the Israel Palestinian terrorism which is a tinderbox for WW3.

And its not over yet. We still have Iran and Syria at least.

So why are we there?

If you don't know already it can't be explained to you in any way you would accept.

 

[peepnklown]

That we know of.

If we don’t know, then we shouldn’t have invaded Iraq under the ‘War on Terror’ ticket. If the government has the proof, they are sure not showing anyone.

But hardly something we could be sure of before the war.

So, those inspectors looking for WMDs didn’t count?
It’s been a few years since we supposedly won this war, I don’t see any WMDs now either.

in fact we have found out since there were contacts between the two.

Happen to have a source?
Oddly enough the so-called 911 commission found no “collaborative relationship,” and 2 senior officials from the FBI & CIA concurred with them.

They attacked us there every chance they got.

Which American port did they attack? Ah, I am playing with you.
This was an agreement made between Iraq and the UN. If Iraq broke a rule, it’s up to the UN to handle things, not a single nation.

The first world war was caused by an assassination.

Not if we are talking about why the US jumped into the fight but, the whole shady Lusitania situation and other factors might be derailing this thread.

Saddam was involved in terrorism.

Did you happen to have that source?
If we are talking about bin Laden and Saddam once more it seems there is no evidence for this.

We still have Iran and Syria at least.

Well, hopefully the American people will wake up before this happens.

If you don't know already it can't be explained to you in any way you would accept.

See, that’s the funny thing, you still haven’t provided concrete evidence.

I’m sorry but we were lied to.
1 - Bush said Iraq was attempting to purchase items to enrich uranium which was a lie. The Department of Energy debunked this.
2 - Bush said Iraq was trying to get uranium from Africa via British intelligence which was a lie. The CIA admits this document was a forgery.
3 – The CIA reports that Iraq showed no evidence of an Iraq nuclear weapons program which shows us that Bush and his administration has lied.
4 – Bush said that Iraq had chemical and biological weapons but, US and British forces have found no traces despite a huge search.

I could go on but I believe this is enough for now.

 

[arnegrim]

If we don’t know, then we shouldn’t have invaded Iraq under the ‘War on Terror’ ticket. If the government has the proof, they are sure not showing anyone.

So, those inspectors looking for WMDs didn’t count?
It’s been a few years since we supposedly won this war, I don’t see any WMDs now either.

12 years of 'looking for WMDs' and being given the run-around by Saddam the entire time does not hint at 'something to hide'?

Happen to have a source?

Oddly enough the so-called 911 commission found no “collaborative relationship,” and 2 senior officials from the FBI & CIA concurred with them.

They found no collaborative relationship in regards to 911... but they did find contacts.

Which American port did they attack? Ah, I am playing with you.

This was an agreement made between Iraq and the UN. If Iraq broke a rule, it’s up to the UN to handle things, not a single nation.

The UN was too busy hiding its scandal to hold Iraq accountable.

Did you happen to have that source?

If we are talking about bin Laden and Saddam once more it seems there is no evidence for this.

http://www.kdp.pp.se/old/chemical.html
http://www.husseinandterror.com/

 

[ScottishJohn]

12 years of 'looking for WMDs' and being given the run-around by Saddam the entire time does not hint at 'something to hide'?

You could use the same argument about the US and Guantanamo bay, and refusing to let inspectors speak to detainees. I am convinced the US have a lot to hide at Guantanamo bay, and while their refusal to fullycooperate with outside agencies does heighten my suspicion it could just as easily (and just as likely) be a case of pride and stubbornness as a serious attempt at deception. No leader wants to look like they are a pushover.

They found no collaborative relationship in regards to 911... but they did find contacts.

Contacts are not conclusive. There are plenty of US contacts with terrorist organisations. Extensive private funding of the IRA for instance, not to mention CIA involvement in the Mujahadeen. Are they being persued with the same lack of regard for cost and sense as Saddam Hussein was? What about Bin Laden? He is pretty much unanimously accepted as being instrumental in the 911 attacks, yet noone seems that bothered about him any more.

The UN was too busy hiding its scandal to hold Iraq accountable.

Did they actually make any effort to hide the oil for food mess? If they did it wasn't a particularly effective one. In any case the US was using far more Iraqi oil to buy off Jordan Syria and Turkey to have any legitimacy when it comes to throwing around allegations of corruption.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/02/02/iraq.oil.smuggle/

 

[ballfan]

You could use the same argument about the US and Guantanamo bay, and refusing to let inspectors speak to detainees. I am convinced the US have a lot to hide at Guantanamo bay, and while their refusal to fullycooperate with outside agencies does heighten my suspicion it could just as easily (and just as likely) be a case of pride and stubbornness as a serious attempt at deception. No leader wants to look like they are a pushover.

At the same time it invalidates every arguement you've ever used against the WMD issue. You're forced to say the US was correct in being suspicious of Iraq and then, in its best interests, being careful to make sure for certain they didn't exist.

Did they actually make any effort to hide the oil for food mess?

Wow. Unbelieveable. You just pegged your every opinion as being generally worthless. If you can't see they attempted to hide that scandal is there anything you can see?

 

[utdbear]

If you don't know already it can't be explained to you in any way you would accept.

x2

 

[ScottishJohn]

At the same time it invalidates every arguement you've ever used against the WMD issue. You're forced to say the US was correct in being suspicious of Iraq and then, in its best interests, being careful to make sure for certain they didn't exist.

No that isn't what I said at all. A suspicion without evidence is no precept for an invasion. Would an invasion of the US based on a suspicion be justified? I am not forced to admit to anything. The US was suspicious that Iraq had WMD. Was that suspicion based on fact? No. Did that suspicion form a legal basis for action? No. Did I at any point say or suggest that a suspicion was a good enough reason to act? No. My point was that a lack of cooperation does not automatically equate to guilt- the point still stands.

Wow. Unbelieveable. You just pegged your every opinion as being generally worthless. If you can't see they attempted to hide that scandal is there anything you can see?

Actually I did not offer an opinion in the part of my post you quoted - I asked a question. As far as I can remember they conducted a full inquiry into it, and publicised the fact that Annan's son was involved. Not a very succesful coverup if that is indeed what it was supposed to be.

 

[christalee4]

Numbers one, three and seven: the plan to attack Iraq was in place well before Sept. 11.

http://www.sundayherald.com/39221

Dick Cheney, Rumsfeld, and others see that expanding United States' interests in the Middle Eastern arena is key to securing oil. And if the military industrial complex profits from the expansion of military strength, even better. It's a win-win situation for oil companies and defense industries, and unfortunately a losing situation for many innocent civilians caught in the crossfire and soldiers whose loyalty and faith in the leadership of the country is being used and abused.

 

[Yusuf Evans]

Facts:

Iraq was never connected to any terroritst activity that threatened the US

So why are we there?

Sadaam was a terrorist, okay. He was a hoodlum thug who terrified and kept the people under a heel of oppression and terrorist tactics. Don't believe me, just remember the mass human graves they dug up.

As for why we're there, I guess because the majority of the leadership in Washington thought we should go in.

 

[ScottishJohn]

Sadaam was a terrorist, okay. He was a hoodlum thug who terrified and kept the people under a heel of oppression and terrorist tactics. Don't believe me, just remember the mass human graves they dug up.

While I agree with your general sentiment about Saddam, he was no terrorist. He was the President of Iraq, and the majority of the thugs who did his bidding wore uniforms and operated under the Iraqi flag.

I would also like to point out that however despicable the Hussein regime was, (as that includes the period where Saddam was popular and well supported in the west), invasion for the purpose of Regime Change is against International law.

I fully accept that many people do not care about international law, I just wanted to make the point.

 

[applepowerpc]

I voted "other". We are in Iraq for Israel. That is what the Israeli lobby wants us to do.