fishfleas wrote:I believe that the US did have evidence that supported their being weapons of mass distruction there. I believe also that a cop has the right to shoot someone if he thinks they are aiming a gun at him, regardless of whether it might be a toy. Sometimes you have to make decisions on what you know, and that is sometimes hard to tell. The US has found places that housed stashes of some of the ingredients for the weapons that they sought. It doesn't take a genius to know if you find the ingredients for meth in a meth addicts house to suspect him of making meth.... Same general idea applies here. So do I think invading was correct at the time? Yes. I do. However I do disagree with how Bush handled it. I think it could have been done in a better manner. However, I am NOT in parliment, I was NOT at the meetings and discussions. If you are trying to get support to take action against what you consider a lethal enemy then you don't let them stop you. Point being Bush made a hard decision, and we as Americans SHOULD support the decision until it is over.
This is just another of my huge beefs with the Media. The media shows us all the bad stuff because it's "Good" news. They tear down people because it's interesting. I dont' entirely agree with Bush on everything, but I think the people not keeping their mouths shut until it's over are 10 times worse. We have to trust our leaders in this, because that is what we have them in place for.
Support the troops.
Well, that is what the majority of people thought at the time. Now the evidence is out (watch 60 minutes as of late?). America was so hot to go to war, and especially with Saddam, since he sat in potential (or did sit) control of a large percentage of the world's oil wells, that we were ready to believe in anything that came our way.
The intelligence we gathered came from German sources who had met with an Iraqi man that claimed to have worked in Sadaam's chemical weapons program. He gave the Germans and the Americans all kinds of false information, just so that we would take Sadaam out of power.
When the Beast is hungry, he demands to be fed...and AMerica was fed. We were going into Iraq no matter what, and these lies were good enough to fool the American people who were blind with Hatred and wanted Revenge...(deny it if you want, but that is the nature of what happened).
When the UN inspector's went to the "Chemical Plant" site...they did tests on the property and on the soil. Guess what?
Nothing...absolutely nothing! Sadaam never had a Chemical weapons plant in that spot that Mr. Curveball (his alias) said he worked and witnessed people dying from exposure and experimentations.
And a cop does not have the right to shoot someone if somebody just comes up to you and says So and So has a gun...matter of fact, Sadaam was complying with Bush's demands, and was destroying his missle arsenal to show signs of peace. Sadaam didn't want to got to war with us.
When you go to war, you should have hard evidence for the invasion. Why? Because you cannot go to war on the premise of "what if's" or "maybe's"...if that is the case, then China can go to war with the United States on the same premise. "What if the United States has Nuclear Bombs?" or "Maybe the US has Chemical or Biological weapons?" But going to war with us would be much easier, because the world KNOWS we have these types of weapons in our aresenal, it's no secret.
Going to war with Iraq was wrong, and it is the greatest blunder in American history! We will never be free from the economic fall out from this war! We will be paying on the interest for the next ten generations or more.
