Bush did the right thing by going into Iraq.

[walkerd]

Answer one very basic question for me then: How did some 100,000 Kurds and an unknown number of Iranians die? Simultaneous food poisoning? Plague? I was under the impression that good ol Saddam gassed the poor bastards.

I am not sure what you are getting at. That is your proof of WOMD?

Unless you want to provide some evidence I guess we have nothing more to say. If you can not or will not supply any supporting evidence of WOMD then there is nothing more to say. Show me a news report, show me an offical press release with proof, anything will do.

Sorry for the delay in my response. Here is one source: http://britons4peace.org.uk/articles/raju2.html

In 1988, as a staff member working for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I documented Iraqi chemical weapons attacks on 49 Kurdish villages in Dihok Province along Iraq's border with Turkey. These attacks began on Aug. 25, 1988, five days after the Iran-Iraq war ended, and were specifically targeted on civilians.

As a result of the committee's report, the Senate unanimously approved comprehensive sanctions on Iraq.

Between March 1987 and August 1988, Iraq made extensive use of chemical weapons against Kurdish villages as part of a campaign aimed at depopulating rural Kurdistan. These attacks have been well documented by human rights groups, forensic investigators and the Kurds themselves. Many occurred in places far from the front line in the Iran-Iraq war.

The Kurdish survivors of the Halabja attack all blame Iraq, and many report seeing Iraqi markings on the low-flying aircraft that delivered the lethal gas. While the most deadly, the Halabja attack was one of between 60 and 180 such attacks that took thousands of civilian lives.

PETER GALBRAITH
Washington, Feb. 3, 2003

And further,

Iraqi forces used mustard and nerve gases, as well as mass executions, to kill some 100,000 Kurds in the genocidal 1988 Anfal campaign. The commander, Gen. Ali Hassan al-Majid, said of the Kurds, in a taped speech obtained by Human Rights Watch: "I will kill them all with chemical weapons! Who is going to say anything? The international community?"

It looks as though several people people beat me to putting in sources. Mustard gas and nerve gas, if you were unaware of it, just happen to be WMD. He did have them at one point. We know that for certain. Based on his behavior and past experience, it was entirely reasonable to assume that he would keeps such weapons. He would likely think he was giving up some shred of power, something he never would have done intentionally.

The point is not to say the use of Chemical Weapons in 1987 is absolute proof of those same weapons existing in 2002, but if anyone ever ACTED guilty about such things, it was Iraq. Why were they so determined to disallow UN inspectors unrestricted access? Why were they behaving like they had something to hide if they did not? No, its not hard evidence nor is it a smoking gun. The lack of hard evidence would hurt your case in courtroom, but how does it "prove" that 1.) there never was any WMD and 2.) the United States invaded knowing fully that there were no WMD??

There will always be a conspiracy theorist around to tell you all about how the President knew everything about everything and even saying that Bush secretly contracted the 9/11 attacks. There are also lots of sources claiming that the US government has extensive relation with space aliens. You believe that too?

So 15 years ago Saddam had WOMD therefor he has them now? Even thougth no one can find any physical evidence of them.

Thank you for the resposne but it appears we are done here now.

 

[walkerd]

The fact that we do not border an Islamic country that we at at war with didn't stop 19 radical Islamics from crashing airplanes into building here in the US, now did it/

You still do not make it clear why the drama in Russia has anything to do with safety of children in the USA.

I couldn't help but think, what if it was here in the US that the terrorist attacked on the kids first day of school instead of in Russia.

How do you think the Chechin fighters would make there way to the USA?
Why do you think Chechin fighters would invade the USA?
How do you think the Chechin fighters would have actualy invaded the USA and held a school to ransom?
For that matter ransom in regard to the USSR treatment of Chechnia?

Do you see what I am saying?

It was widely known that the terrorist and extremist flocked to Iraq in order to fight our troops. They saw this as a good and easy opportunity to harm the US. Who knows how many of them we killed. Each one of those we killed over there is one less that could potentialy come over here and do us harm.

Was this before you invaded or after? Most of the people who "flocked" to Iraq were there before the USA attacked. If they wanted to harm the USa perhaps they should have flocked to the USA.

Everything.

I already gave the reason for this on the original post.

Bush did the right thing.

:roll:

I seriuosly believe that if we hadn't gone over to Iraq, some of those terrorist who got killed over there would have made plans to do some kind of strike somewhere. Out of those at least some would have picked the US as a target. If they would have been succesful, we will never know, and I'm glad.

So because someone may have been a terrorist it is ok to kill him. How about rather then Iraq you target the terrorists themselves?

I know we lost over a thousand troops in Iraq already. But I sincerely believe they didn't die vain. Because of them, the kids who went to school today all came home safely.

Whats with the kids? Do you know some plot the rest of us are unaware of? Is there some threat to US school kids the rest of us are unaware of?

Like I said your post is all over the place. perhaps you would like to post more clear and specific points.

 

[godofthunder9010]

Israel/Palestine is far too controversial for the politicians to even mention it, but Saddam spent a lot of money on paying the family of suicide bombers attacking Israel and doing whatever he could to sabotage peace in the Holy Land. Israel will certainly not miss him.

I'm curious walkered, what do you think DID happen to the rather substantial stockpiles of WOMD that Saddam had all those years ago? Did he destroy them? Give them away? I think it would be naive to say that the United States managed to entirely wipe out all of his stockpiles in the first Gulf War.

 

[Redneck]

So because someone may have been a terrorist it is ok to kill him.

Yes.

Like I said your post is all over the place. perhaps you would like to post more clear and specific points.

Kill the attitude. You have yet to post any clear counters to the points raised by others aside from a very windy rendition of "I'm right, you're wrong."

The specifics of the Beslan tragedy of course had nothing to do with the United States, but gladius never said they did. To my eye, the proven willingness of these groups to use such measures against those they view as their enemies (including the United States), as well as the fact that the Beslan massacre was carried out by the same organization that attacked my own country ( http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2004-09-06-al-qaeda-chechnya_x.htm ), means that this group still presents a clear threat to the free world.

 

[gladius]

How do you think the Chechin fighters would make there way to the USA?
Why do you think Chechin fighters would invade the USA?
How do you think the Chechin fighters would have actualy invaded the USA and held a school to ransom?
For that matter ransom in regard to the USSR treatment of Chechnia?

Who said the terrorist have to be Chechen.

Do you see what I am saying?

Yes I do, I see you have no understanding of the situation we are in. Since you are saying the terrorist have to be Chechen to hit the USA.

It was widely known that the terrorist and extremist flocked to Iraq in order to fight our troops. They saw this as a good and easy opportunity to harm the US. Who knows how many of them we killed. Each one of those we killed over there is one less that could potentialy come over here and do us harm.

Was this before you invaded or after? Most of the people who "flocked" to Iraq were there before the USA attacked. If they wanted to harm the USa perhaps they should have flocked to the USA.

Like I said you have no understanding of the situation.

Alot of the terrorist who went to Iraq to fight us aren't even Iraqis (I'm not talking about the Saddam die-hards or the Mahdi militia). Alot of them filtered in from other Muslim countries, because it was easier to go into Iraq than the USA, here you saying what's right or wrong when you haven't even got a clue of whats happening. Not to mention you only think terrorist who are willing to kill children have to be Chechen.

I seriuosly believe that if we hadn't gone over to Iraq, some of those terrorist who got killed over there would have made plans to do some kind of strike somewhere. Out of those at least some would have picked the US as a target. If they would have been succesful, we will never know, and I'm glad.

So because someone may have been a terrorist it is ok to kill him.

Like Redneck already said, yes.

You're saying its okay to wait for another Beslan before we act. I hope you don't have kids.

How about rather then Iraq you target the terrorists themselves?

By going into Iraq we took the fight to them and eliminated alot of them, before they got a chance to hit US soil.

I know we lost over a thousand troops in Iraq already. But I sincerely believe they didn't die vain. Because of them, the kids who went to school today all came home safely.

Whats with the kids? Do you know some plot the rest of us are unaware of? Is there some threat to US school kids the rest of us are unaware of?

What makes you think that the kind of mentality that comited that henious act in Beslan won't do that here.

Like I said your post is all over the place. perhaps you would like to post more clear and specific points.

My post was specific and to the point. You most likely have no understanding of the situation we are in, or you must think that the terrorist are such nice people who play by the rules, that they won't do the same thing in the USA given the chance, as the did in Beslan.

Kill the attitude. You have yet to post any clear counters to the points raised by others aside from a very windy rendition of "I'm right, you're wrong."

The specifics of the Beslan tragedy of course had nothing to do with the United States, but gladius never said they did. To my eye, the proven willingness of these groups to use such measures against those they view as their enemies (including the United States), as well as the fact that the Beslan massacre was carried out by the same organization that attacked my own country ( http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2004-09-06-al-qaeda-chechnya_x.htm ), means that this group still presents a clear threat to the free world.

Exactly.

The kind of mentality that is willing to crash passenger planes into civilian buildings and murder hundreds of shcool children is kind of mentality that cannot be reasoned with, and if given the chance will be more than happy to do it again.

 

[EagleZtrike]

Disagree, poorly planned.

 

[A Can of Man]

I don't care about what the runup was.
Right now what we have is a situation where a free and stable Iraq MUST be secured or else the consequences will be (with almost 100% certainty) devistating. Especially for the USA and also for Europe.

 

[EagleZtrike]

Iunno I just feel the area there was more stable when it was left alone.

 

[A Can of Man]

Yeah I know.
But now is what we got and now is what we got to deal with.
We will have plenty of time to discuss whether the whole thing was right or wrong when the whole thing is over and hopefully won.

 

[gladius]

Right now there is a battle that needs to be fought within the Islamic world itself.

It is the battle between the Moderate Muslims and the Radical Muslims who want to highjack the religion.

If this battle is NOT fought, then eventually, the way things are going, then the battle will become a war of civilizations, Islam versus the West.

Right now Bush is trying to trying to give those that want a more moderate Islam a chance. If they don't step up or hold on strongly enough to the chance they have been given, then then more radical elements will take over, then those radicals will get what they've always wanted an East versus West war.

 

[godofthunder9010]

One of the biggest issues working against moderates is the fact that most Middle-Eastern media can't for the life of them report any news without intentionally twisting things to bash the United States and Israel. "Arabic News Agency" is becoming for famous for making up BS stories everyday. Sadly, I can't think if any exceptions.

For those who hadn't heard, a Saudi newspaper has recently reported the "fact" that Americans are stealing organs from dead Iraqis and shipping them back to the US for profit. :roll:

 

[laurenbeaty]

Israel/Palestine is far too controversial for the politicians to even mention it, but Saddam spent a lot of money on paying the family of suicide bombers attacking Israel and doing whatever he could to sabotage peace in the Holy Land. Israel will certainly not miss him.

I'm curious walkered, what do you think DID happen to the rather substantial stockpiles of WOMD that Saddam had all those years ago? Did he destroy them? Give them away? I think it would be naive to say that the United States managed to entirely wipe out all of his stockpiles in the first Gulf War.

Nicely put. I agree with you. I'm sure Isreal won't miss him, either.

 

[Snauhi]

The regular operation was perfectly planned, but the american officers made the biggest mistake.... to think of what would happen after the "regular" war. And now its so many rebels there so you can fight them your hole life.

 

[Sexybeast]

if American forces can really bring freedom and prosperity to iraqi ppl, the Bush is right to do these things , and he can take as much as oil he wnats to..

 

[Damien435]

The strangest part about this IMO is that Democrats and foreigners alike will spend hours saying that the Bush Administration failed to plan for peace in Iraq, but then when a Republican asks them how they would have planned the process the Democrats start to stutter, ramble, change the subject, some will even say it doesn't matter because they did not make this war, Bush did, even if that particular Democrat gave the President his support during planning and the build up and in the months after the invasion, not till after this particular Democrat became the leading candidate to challenge Bush in the election did they start to voice their protest to the war.

So, because Bush could not accurately plan on something that had really never occured before but went ahead and tryed to bring freedom and end the oppression against the people of Iraq he is such a terrible person, even though others were content to let the slaughter and oppression continue. Because Bush had the balls to stick his neck out and risk his entire political future, and maybe even his life, he is such a terrible man. Bi-partisan politics are "destroying" America, the party not in power is supposed to act like a watchdog to the party in power, not try and destroy the entire country by trying to start another civil war.