Because they have links to Osama! Oh? They don't? Well, because they have weapons of mass destruction! Bad bad nukes! Oh? They don't? ...Hmm, to free the Iraqis from evil evil Saddam! Yes.

Discuss please.

Yeah everybody knows he just went there for the oil and nothing else he just needed a cover up tp go to Iraq, and know hes in way over his head.

The only reason we went to Iraq is because of the Man. He controlls everything, even the pesident, hell he might even be the president. The war in Iraq is a pointless way that we are killing manny "innocent" people. Like the woman and children over there. I wish we could just stop, but it does not seem that we are going too.

Because of that stupid war my cousin, who's a Dutch soldier, was sent there.

But my mom has a collegue from Iraq and he told her that Saddam really was cruel and because of him alot of people also died, so that Saddam is gone out of Iraq is a good thing, but probably one of the main reasons for Bush to attack Iraq was for the oil.

I dunno, but it seems Bush is making alot of lousy excuses or his doing which might just be to gain oil or something else we dont know. Iraq wasnt much of a deal when Bill Clinton was around. Now the devil sits on his throne, the world goes upside down. This war damn right seems pointless. One man, only one stinking man causing havoc in Iraq. Look at this, so many soldiers have died, so many innocent families, children crushed. And for what? some stupid maniac who only needs a bullet to the head to get things through his and his followers thick skulls, and some power hungry president who has no idea of what he wants to do.

Talk about your reincarnation of Benito Mussolini

[*yawns i need sleep - -]

My Father went to afghanistan as a peacekeeper for the war in Iraq. He was gone for 3 months at a time, would come home for one month, then go again for yet another 3 months. I hated seeing him leave. I wish this stupid war would end... I work at a Motophoto, and had to take passport pictures of all the army guys flying over there. I wanted to cry, it sucked.

My Father went to afghanistan as a peacekeeper for the war in Iraq. He was gone for 3 months at a time, would come home for one month, then go again for yet another 3 months. I hated seeing him leave. I wish this stupid war would end... I work at a Motophoto, and had to take passport pictures of all the army guys flying over there. I wanted to cry, it sucked.

I know how you feel my Dad was overthere before the war started and during the war and it sucked so much everyday glued to Cnn. I hope your Father got back all right.

there is no reason for this war to continue

There really isnt a reason for this war to continue. And yea it does seem like te reason is oil and yea, as a Arabian myself, Sadaam sucked, but the ppl in iraq want the US out, they took out Sadaam, so why are they still there. If you look at every country the US has been at war with in the past 50 years, you'll see that they still have military bases in every single one. I hope ur family and friends return soon, but chances are that it may be a while

I know how you feel my Dad was overthere before the war started and during the war and it sucked so much everyday glued to Cnn. I hope your Father got back all right.

He got back fine, and he's been home for a while. I don't think he's going back this time. Thank god. I hope this stupid war ends soon.

He got back fine, and he's been home for a while. I don't think he's going back this time. Thank god. I hope this stupid war ends soon.

Im glad to hear that

How this war started is a mystery.

Now Iran.

Stop spamming in this thread.

How is this spam

Check out this video about the war: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRsEKpSlRbA

And this one shows how its just sucking so much for both sides

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCVp21sJhvs

this wont be over until Iraq has a stable government, and military so they can defend themselfs. Plus alot of soldiers are afraid to shoot to kill the terroist now, because they dont wanna kill the innocent people. If that happens the slodiers get charged with murder.
To whoever said we are killing innocent people. The soldiers have no way to tell who is inncoent because the the bad people wear no type of uniform. soo sometimes some innocent peolle are killed.

How is this spam

Check out this video about the war: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRsEKpSlRbA

And this one shows how its just sucking so much for both sides

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCVp21sJhvs

Man boths videos are REALLY sad

To be honest this war is a waste of time. How can a country that can barely afford food afford weapons of mass destruction.

Because of that stupid war my cousin, who's a Dutch soldier, was sent there.

But my mom has a collegue from Iraq and he told her that Saddam really was cruel and because of him alot of people also died, so that Saddam is gone out of Iraq is a good thing, but probably one of the main reasons for Bush to attack Iraq was for the oil.
so saddam was cruel...they just need to hired a sniper and shot saddam in the head..solve saddam problem..not send an army to kill innocent people and children..!so we know..war in iraq is just for oil..!

some oil we're getting gas is $3.22 where i'm at

bush just gave america a problem that other presidents will have to deal with :/

How to stop war. We can't kick Bush ass and told him to stop.

Yata, who is the MAN?

To be honest this war is a waste of time. How can a country that can barely afford food afford weapons of mass destruction.


Are... Are you serious?

That is one of the stupidest questions I have ever heard. It would make sense that they would afford WOMS Because they used money they should have for food on said wepons

But no, they had no weapons. The U.S.A and other countries are there for no reason. Except oil, but they deny that so :rolleyes:

........................................ .......FUCK BUSH!!!!!!! and also i hope that the war in iraq does end soon. Im tired of turning on the tv and hearing about suicide bombings and about inacent women and children are dieing over a stupid war that is fueled by nothing but hate, ignorence, and expensive oil.

To be honest this war is a waste of time. How can a country that can barely afford food afford weapons of mass destruction.
government doesnt give the people money. They keep it all and kill off the rebels! then use the cash to blow up stuff!

whatever you say..i not agree when america attack iraq...many innocent people die....what they want is the oil...that they real mission...to get the oil sourse......

........................................ .......FUCK BUSH!!!!!!! and also i hope that the war in iraq does end soon. Im tired of turning on the tv and hearing about suicide bombings and about inacent women and children are dieing over a stupid war that is fueled by nothing but hate, ignorence, and expensive oil.

yeah you right waterbender........Go TO HELL YOU BUSH.........

I will tell you what. All those people who think that we need to leave soon, all sadly naive. It will take years to create a stable government, why? Because forming a government doesn't just take a year.

First, the country's economy has to improve. There is a clear link between economic success and government stability (Japan after WWII vs. the Balkans). The most effective way, keep in mind that this is just my opinion, you can argue it all you want, is to distribute the money coming from oil production into the general country and more importantly a better infrastructure. If the government is allowed to keep the funds, it would just create another illiberal regime or fuel a civil war (Other Middle East countries and a plethora of African countries).

Secondly, if we leave a young Iraqi government in this state, it would just take weeks before fundamentalists start a civil war. Heck, the UN is still in Kosovo. The way to weaken their power is to, as odd as it sounds, give them some representation in government. Let them vent their hot air in somewhere it could be legally checked. The representation problem is easier said than done, considering all the different ethnicities in the country.

The thing that will change everything will be the elections in 2006 and 08 for Congress and the President respectively.

Well, you can't forget the other reason we're staying in there; the cash. Weapons and oil company owners are dancing in the streets with all the money they're raking in.

Are... Are you serious?

That is one of the stupidest questions I have ever heard. It would make sense that they would afford WOMS Because they used money they should have for food on said wepons

But no, they had no weapons. The U.S.A and other countries are there for no reason. Except oil, but they deny that so :rolleyes:

yup oil oil oil and no other because of the oil.. the wealth and the enlargement of us territory

the iraqis are willing to die because if they made themselves killed to kill a marine, is a rightful and a HOLY deeds.... no point for our troops staying there for long the iraqis love to die to kill the US soldiers...

i've got a friend that is joining the army now, and he hopes he gets to go to iraq. when i asked him why he's goin his answer was "11 september". i don't really want him to go but it's something he really wants to do, and i can understand him. it's a really long story, would take months to explain it all XD

he also says that he knows bush has done many things that he don't like, but he's much better than the others when it comes to army

Well, it would seem that he was misled. 9/11 has no connections to Iraq. I can understand going to Afghanistan, but Bush hardly cares about Osama anymore.

i've got a friend that is joining the army now, and he hopes he gets to go to iraq. when i asked him why he's goin his answer was "11 september". i don't really want him to go but it's something he really wants to do, and i can understand him. it's a really long story, would take months to explain it all XD

he also says that he knows bush has done many things that he don't like, but he's much better than the others when it comes to army

man if i was you i'd tie him up and never let him leave. You should have hime read A People's History of the United States by Howard Zinn (this guy served in the military) and Lies My Teacher Told Me by James Loewen or at least make him go over the military history in these books b4 he makes the final desicion to go .

yeah we went to war for oil and thats why im paying 3 dollars for gas.

why do you say he hardly cares about osama anymore. he has tons of special force members after him, and they say one navy seal is worth 100 infantry. So if your sending a 1000 S.F. mem what else can u do. Plus what has osama been able to do but hide in a cave, and its harder than u think to find a dude in a cave in a mountain in a country. u sound way to left

If he really cared about Osama he'd have continued to focus our resources on him instead of diverting most of them on attacking Iraq for no good reason.

If he really cared about Osama he'd have continued to focus our resources on him instead of diverting most of them on attacking Iraq for no good reason.
Thank you. : ) Anyway, I was doing a little research, but I couldn't find anything good about the number of troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. But most likely there are more special forces units in Iraq than in Afghanistan.

So we should take 500,000 troops and just invade a bunch of countrys that dont wont us their. So if hes in pakastan we should just send our troop in there, first u cant, second your not going to find a guy in a 2 mile deep cave in nepal. So we should spend billions on troops and equiptment finding a guy that has no power anymore. I would love to find this A$$ and kill him, its almost impossible. Wait till he comes out of hiding and then get him. Most likely this guy is going to stay in a cave forever. Plus mostly its the army in Afghan which includes ranger, green berets, and delta force. they will get him when he pops his head

So we should take 500,000 troops and just invade a bunch of countrys that dont wont us their.

Like we did with Iraq? Absolutely not. ; ) (Troop count is probably off, but you get jist of it I hope)

And we had Osama surrounded in the Tora Bora mountains. Instead of using our own troops to engage him, we let Afghan troops do it while we attacked Iraq...

Also, Osama is our enemy. So yes, we should focus most our resources on capturing him. We shouldn't be attacking countries that have absolutely nothing to do with him, especially when there's no intelligent reason to attack Iraq.

its all about the oil baby

seriously irag did not even start this osama binladen did...so why is bush going for iraq when he should be going for afghinastan, an searching for binladen. total waste of time.

My Father went to afghanistan as a peacekeeper for the war in Iraq. He was gone for 3 months at a time, would come home for one month, then go again for yet another 3 months. I hated seeing him leave. I wish this stupid war would end... I work at a Motophoto, and had to take passport pictures of all the army guys flying over there. I wanted to cry, it sucked.

hey, a lot of people feel that way. i hate what this war has done. everytime i visit my grandparents, there's a church with one flag for every dead soldier, and i can hardly see the grass. hope all goes well for you and your family.

seriously irag did not even start this osama binladen did...so why is bush going for iraq when he should be going for afghinastan, an searching for binladen. total waste of time.

Bush is there to finish what his dad started. i can just see him, "Are you proud of me daddy? I tricked a whole nation! He He He He!"

I bet osama and Bush planned this whole thing out from the start--bush probably brided osama to help him become famous.

I bet osama and Bush planned this whole thing out from the start--bush probably brided osama to help him become famous.

You should go to hell for just saying that!

but onto the discussion...

In my opinion i find all of your arguments and reasons very ignorant and onesided, i could basically turn on the news and hear the same arguments by the libral media. My father is a Special Forces Marine (Force Recon Marine) he is a gunny... he has been to Iraq twice and i think through his stories and info and libral info i have gathered through the news i have formed a sutibal opinion.

The war in Iraq is just in every way shape and form. (i'm going to counter all arguments that can be used against my post)

1.) Some may say iraq never had WMD's- yes in fact they did, saddam yoused bio chemicals on the kurds in 1988

2.)we whent in for oil- gas prices are $3 a gallon....... you might wanna rethink that statement

3.)Iraq's people do not want us there- In fact that is not true the people that do not want us there are not the iraq people but insergents from other countries, the people in iraq cannot show there support valiantly in the streets because of threats from insergents

(cant think of ne more late sorry... post and i will explain)

I have a feeling that the video of iraq, fails in comparison next to this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5gi0g7UYdg&mode=related&search=

People belive bush is a bad presendent yet, he is a very good one ideed just unfortunate things have happend during his term.. He is the forrunner in the war on terror, manny of us live in a bubble here in america not living true "Harsh" lives, to live in terror everyday that you may be blown up is never good... Bush did the right think, a Man (saddam) with links to terrorist activites and his fortune could be a catastrophie. to take out a man like that and set up a republic where the people can choose for themselves the leader and live better lives is the right thing,the reason that the insergents want us out is because as republics grow (sadi arabia) so does there power and weath, and the ratical muslims belive this is not acceptible.

In the 1930's a vicisous leader named Adalf Hitler was slowly gainning power in germany, As this man gained power The surrounding powers gave into him and did not stop him when he overstepped his bondaries, but a man named Winston Churchill was sceptical and wanted to immediatly get rid of adalf hitler before he became an imanent threat....noone listend.... ten years later with the invasion of poland WWII has begun and a discovery is made, millions of jews are being killed in consentration camps, Hitler's own people being sentenced to death,the Holocaust, one of the most horrifying things ever to happen... but what if people had listend to Winston and took hitler out of power before he became a threat millions of people would have survived, Now compare Iraq to WWII both have vicious leaders, both have 1 leader of a nation of power skeptical about his actions, ask yourself would you have rather have had bush wait for another world war to get involved, or are you glad this monster is taken care of......

The last thing i will say is, during the american revolution many skeptics were around calling our fore fathers Idiots for committing treason agaisnt brittan, saying that it will never work and starting war will only cause problems....... they were wrong, because of them USA was created... and it led to the French revolution, and then the revolutions all over europe, just because some men thought that freedom was everymans birthright, but i guess all of you non-supporters don't think iraq's people deserve freedom......

1.) Some may say iraq never had WMD's- yes in fact they did, saddam yoused bio chemicals on the kurds in 1988

I doubt anyone would state that Iraq never had WMD's. Saying a country having WMDs over a decade ago, but not having any now, is a justification to attack them is pretty humorous though. Iraq obviously didn't have any WMDs when we attacked them, and the original justification for attacking them was because we thought they had WMDs that could be used on America. Please elaborate on how we aren't in the wrong here?

Also, there's absolutely no evidence that suggests Saddam was involved with Al-Qaeda. Actually, appearently Al-Qaeda disliked Saddam. Again, what justifications did we have for attacking Iraq?

Is Saddam a douche? Yeah. Was he any threat to the US? No evidence shows that he was. There's plenty of douches out there, why attack this one? Why not get the others? There's no reasoning to be found.

You should go to hell for just saying that!

but onto the discussion...

In my opinion i find all of your arguments and reasons very ignorant and onesided, i could basically turn on the news and hear the same arguments by the libral media. My father is a Special Forces Marine (Force Recon Marine) he is a gunny... he has been to Iraq twice and i think through his stories and info and libral info i have gathered through the news i have formed a sutibal opinion.

The war in Iraq is just in every way shape and form. (i'm going to counter all arguments that can be used against my post)

1.) Some may say iraq never had WMD's- yes in fact they did, saddam yoused bio chemicals on the kurds in 1988
Biochemical weapons are not WMD's. WMD's are nuclear warheads that can blow the hell out of an entire city. By your logic, I'm capable of making WMD's by mixing bleach and ammonia to make nerve gas.

2.)we whent in for oil- gas prices are $3 a gallon....... you might wanna rethink that statement

3.)Iraq's people do not want us there- In fact that is not true the people that do not want us there are not the iraq people but insergents from other countries, the people in iraq cannot show there support valiantly in the streets because of threats from insergents

(cant think of ne more late sorry... post and i will explain)

I have a feeling that the video of iraq, fails in comparison next to this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5gi0g7UYdg&mode=related&search=

Invading a country isn't the best way to spread democracy. It is, however, a good way to make money for the defense industry. Which is, of course, what this war is about. Money.

People belive bush is a bad presendent yet, he is a very good one ideed just unfortunate things have happend during his term.. He is the forrunner in the war on terror, manny of us live in a bubble here in america not living true "Harsh" lives, to live in terror everyday that you may be blown up is never good... Bush did the right think, a Man (saddam) with links to terrorist activites and his fortune could be a catastrophie. to take out a man like that and set up a republic where the people can choose for themselves the leader and live better lives is the right thing,the reason that the insergents want us out is because as republics grow (sadi arabia) so does there power and weath, and the ratical muslims belive this is not acceptible.
Show me proof that Saddam himself purposely harbored Al-quaida in his country. And again, spreading democracy is all fine and dandy, but invading and putting military bases on top of said country is no way to go about spreading this democracy.

In the 1930's a vicisous leader named Adalf Hitler was slowly gainning power in germany, As this man gained power The surrounding powers gave into him and did not stop him when he overstepped his bondaries, but a man named Winston Churchill was sceptical and wanted to immediatly get rid of adalf hitler before he became an imanent threat....noone listend.... ten years later with the invasion of poland WWII has begun and a discovery is made, millions of jews are being killed in consentration camps, Hitler's own people being sentenced to death,the Holocaust, one of the most horrifying things ever to happen... but what if people had listend to Winston and took hitler out of power before he became a threat millions of people would have survived, Now compare Iraq to WWII both have vicious leaders, both have 1 leader of a nation of power skeptical about his actions, ask yourself would you have rather have had bush wait for another world war to get involved, or are you glad this monster is taken care of......
Saddam was a dictator, so was Hitler. That's about as far as their connection goes. Saddam was nowhere near as bad as Hitler when he rose to power.

The last thing i will say is, during the american revolution many skeptics were around calling our fore fathers Idiots for committing treason agaisnt brittan, saying that it will never work and starting war will only cause problems....... they were wrong, because of them USA was created... and it led to the French revolution, and then the revolutions all over europe, just because some men thought that freedom was everymans birthright, but i guess all of you non-supporters don't think iraq's people deserve freedom......
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I recall some other revolution starting every other revolution around the world (including the American Revolution). Blah. I've just replied with my offhand knowledge, which isn't that great. I know I must've got something wrong, meh. It'd be nice if someone can send me some links, as I'm too lazy to do research.

I'll just let Miburo respond to you. :P /just had to put unresearched 2 cents in

weapon of mass destruction

n : a weapon that kills or injures civilian as well as military personnel (nuclear and chemical and biological weapons)


ninja, if it was about money we would all be floatting in dough, but we are not, i know you said its just off hand stuff (so was mine) but just think about that $3 per gallon if it was all about money we would be out already, and not in afganastan too...

"Saddam was a dictator, so was Hitler. That's about as far as their connection goes. Saddam was nowhere near as bad as Hitler when he rose to power."

actually, hitler and saddam are very alike, hitler wasn't bad at all untill he actually gained full control and big allies.... but at the stage saddam was in compared to the same stage (time) as hitler they are very similar, 2nd class dictators, greedy, insane, vicious, ect...

"Correct me if I'm wrong, but I recall some other revolution starting every other revolution around the world (including the American Revolution). Blah. I've just replied with my offhand knowledge, which isn't that great. I know I must've got something wrong, meh. It'd be nice if someone can send me some links, as I'm too lazy to do research. "

thats really irrelivant, it was an analogy to show that to gain something risks must be taken, and how chain reactions start, in a way you helped my argument by showing how one revolution starts another....

sorry forgot this...


Though they may get scant attention, some of the facts of Saddam's involvement with Islamic terrorism are not disputed. Hamas, the fundamentalist Palestinian group, whose gift to the world is the suicide bomb, has maintained a Baghdad office

i never sad al qaeda i said "terrorists"

if i need to suply more just ask

i never sad al qaeda i said "terrorists"

You do realize that there are litterally hundreds of terrorist organizations throughout the world, right? Why not attack all of the many, many countries in which terrorists reside?

Also, Al-Qaeda are the one's responsible for the 9/11 attacks, you'd think we'd focus on them a bit more before going after random terrorist organizations that are absolutely zero threat to us.....

I know, all i just said is i dint say al qaeda not saying there is or isnt a connection, that i would have to lookup i donnot know off hand, im just telling ninja that i never said al qaeda i said terrorist

weapon of mass destruction

n : a weapon that kills or injures civilian as well as military personnel (nuclear and chemical and biological weapons)
Now you're talking technical stuff. What's quoted in the above is just a general definition without implications. It states that it kills civilians and military personnel, however, it doesn't state how many it kills. When President Bush or another says the words "weapons of mass destruction," they're implying weapons that can at least wipe out a small town in a single usage. And yes, they can be chemical/biological, but of a much grander scale than what you've mentioned. Anyway, if you say the weapons just have to be chemical/biological to be a weapon of mass destruction, then we started a war simply to stop a dictator from using small gas attacks? Any enemy of the United States with an army has the power to attack another with gas, so why haven't we attacked them? Simple, because our President didn't say they had WMD's.

ninja, if it was about money we would all be floatting in dough, but we are not, i know you said its just off hand stuff (so was mine) but just think about that $3 per gallon if it was all about money we would be out already, and not in afganastan too...
Oil companies are floating in dough. So is the military industry. Dick Cheney makes good money off of wars.

actually, hitler and saddam are very alike, hitler wasn't bad at all untill he actually gained full control and big allies.... but at the stage saddam was in compared to the same stage (time) as hitler they are very similar, 2nd class dictators, greedy, insane, vicious, ect...
My world history is rather rusty. But from what I recall, Hitler had a very powerful army. An army that would rank in the top 3 armies of the world at the time. Does Saddam have a powerful army? an airforce?

thats really irrelivant, it was an analogy to show that to gain something risks must be taken, and how chain reactions start, in a way you helped my argument by showing how one revolution starts another....
Alright, let me just point out that you're referring to revolutions, not military intervention from a more powerful country, towards a lesser country. I see your logic. However, I don't think Saddam was a big enough threat to take action to, dissimilar to the reasoning of actions from some of the revolutionists.

Now you're talking technical stuff. What's quoted in the above is just a general definition without implications. It states that it kills civilians and military personnel, however, it doesn't state how many it kills. When President Bush or another says the words "weapons of mass destruction," they're implying weapons that can at least wipe out a small town in a single usage. And yes, they can be chemical/biological, but of a much grander scale than what you've mentioned. Anyway, if you say the weapons just have to be chemical/biological to be a weapon of mass destruction, then we started a war simply to stop a dictator from using small gas attacks?

If i am correct, then it was aproximatly 4000 kurds who where killed, so i guess you were right, what small numbers.

Oil companies are floating in dough. So is the military industry. Dick Cheney makes good money off of wars.
You are right, but the president can't regulate oil prices because that vialates free trade.

My world history is rather rusty. But from what I recall, Hitler had a very powerful army. An army that would rank in the top 3 armies of the world at the time. Does Saddam have a powerful army? an airforce?

Hitler had a powerful military true, but not when he first started out, they had an average sized military, but under hitlers control, they got bigger, but by me compareing hitler to sadam, i am refering to the fact that they are both dicators and both have committed a form of genocide on thier own people, and if we could stop something before it happends isn't that a good thing.

Alright, let me just point out that you're referring to revolutions, not military intervention from a more powerful country, towards a lesser country. I see your logic. However, I don't think Saddam was a big enough threat to take action to, dissimilar to the reasoning of actions from some of the revolutionists.


franced helped the USA in the american revolution.

You are right, but the president can't regulate oil prices because that vialates free trade.

But he can invest in it... And get paid off by people who DO own it.


Hitler had a powerful military true, but not when he first started out, they had an average sized military, but under hitlers control, they got bigger, but by me compareing hitler to sadam, i am refering to the fact that they are both dicators and both have committed a form of genocide on thier own people, and if we could stop something before it happends isn't that a good thing.

Wow. You should look up what it means when the first person compares someone to Hitler in a forum. It's rather amusing.


The thing is, Hitler wanted genocide of everyone but the Germans. He wanted total control of the world. Saddam didn't even fund terrorists... He just wanted absolute control of Iraq. To compare Hitler to Saddam is like comparing a puppy to a gun. (There's not that much similarity other than that they have carbon bonds. {Ha ha! Science joke!})



Okay... The world is "better off" without Saddam. (If you consider being better off is thousands dead and an unendable civil war between religions as well as irrepritable damage to our image and foreign policy... Then yeah.) Why did we go there again? He was supposed to have WMDs and he was SUPPOSED to have been linked with AQ.

Well let's get this straightened out. He had no WMDs. Before the war even started, people were saying he had none. Even Colin Powell said there were none. The only thing close enough to call WMDs are some cans filled with gas that are unusable and have been buried (destroyed in the cheap way) since the first Desert Storm.

Well what about AQ? Oh yeah. That's right. Iraq and AQ were actually enemies. Hell, even Saddam hated AQ. They had no link at all. And what's this? Every former aide to the White House said that there was no connection? (I say former because Bush fired them for disagreeing.)



So why are we in Iraq again?

If i am correct, then it was aproximatly 4000 kurds who where killed, so i guess you were right, what small numbers.
How many people died in Hiroshima? Nagasaki? 214,000 combined. About 50 times more people. This is the kind of death toll that results from WMD's. And nowadays, nukes are even worse than the nukes used on Hiroshima/Nagasaki.


franced helped the USA in the american revolution.
Did they invade us to help?

The thing is, Hitler wanted genocide of everyone but the Germans. He wanted total control of the world. Saddam didn't even fund terrorists... He just wanted absolute control of Iraq. To compare Hitler to Saddam is like comparing a puppy to a gun. (There's not that much similarity other than that they have carbon bonds. {Ha ha! Science joke!})

I am not using hitlers "power" times, before WWII, i know i used genocide but that was another connection, witch is true btw, i was saying that at hitlers start as a small dicator he was in the same position of power and control as sadam has ATM... can you atleast give me that..



Okay... The world is "better off" without Saddam. (If you consider being better off is thousands dead and an unendable civil war between religions as well as irrepritable damage to our image and foreign policy... Then yeah.) Why did we go there again? He was supposed to have WMDs and he was SUPPOSED to have been linked with AQ.

It depends on wich you belive in, the greater good, or the that sacrifice is bad.... I will admit this one thing, I belive the war was needed, but was done about a little wrong, they should have made a better plan.

Well let's get this straightened out. He had no WMDs. Before the war even started, people were saying he had none. Even Colin Powell said there were none. The only thing close enough to call WMDs are some cans filled with gas that are unusable and have been buried (destroyed in the cheap way) since the first Desert Storm.

He DID at one time, so that means he could still have them, there are photos of the Un inspectors driving to the facilities, and you see trucks comming out the oppisite way, (thats speculation)

Well what about AQ? Oh yeah. That's right. Iraq and AQ were actually enemies. Hell, even Saddam hated AQ. They had no link at all. And what's this? Every former aide to the White House said that there was no connection? (I say former because Bush fired them for disagreeing.)


true he hated AQ, but he did have links to other major terrorist groups, and terrorists groups had bases/hideouts in iraq


NINJA's QUOTE How many people died in Hiroshima? Nagasaki? 214,000 combined. About 50 times more people. This is the kind of death toll that results from WMD's. And nowadays, nukes are even worse than the nukes used on Hiroshima/Nagasaki.

First this isn't world war 2, the japenese first off were going to last for EVER and we needed to use drastic measures to help in germany.

also, Terrorism causes more civilion deaths than anything, NONE can denie that and to stop terrorism we need to whipe out people with terrorist links, because even thous sadam hated AQ.. he may have liked someone else and then they link to someone else, and then they link to AQ

Did they invade us to help?

They probably would if the enemy was inside us

These are just to get Iraq destroyed and put US army in troubles .
Even didnot get anything for beneficial there!

after invading Afghanistan and controlling the Oil there, now the next stop is Iraq to control its Oil, as a result, many innocent people are dying (Iraqi people, American soldiers) just to get hold of Oil, and also to spread the US Army around the world, their next target is Iran, then Korea and the story goes on.

SO i guess what is you thinking is war not for Saddam or terrorists ! it is for oil and such resources ! but if is so then i shall be against as in case of labonanies that is most unwanted one for me

No, the war in Iraq is utterly pointless. Fighting against an organized army that doesn't going into hiding is one thing. But fighting against certain people mingled in with everyone else is another. Terrorists are people who hide among the innocent and strike out when they have the perfect opportunity to inflict terror. If Bush wanted to avenge 9/11, well, sorry to say but technically, he's a dumbass. If this is true, his motives are good, however, as I said, fighting the world of terrorists is just like trying to fight smoke. It can't be done. Without proof to suspect the terrorists, capturing them and unraveling them is hopeless. Saddam Hussein and his evil regime is over. Pull out of there Bush. But noo, he just sets his army there fighting terrorists while day after day, more and more people die. Nothing is accomplished. Bush is a fool whatsoever getting people killed just to get at oil, fighting terrorists, or whatnot. If he just pulls out of the Middle East, then things will clear up a bit.

i mean jihad and al whatever bin laden people should just stop all this violence caue its really not worth it and just stop all this war on religion and its just not worth it

Bush doesn't know what to say now, that they haven't found any weapons of mass descrution. He knows that they population is angry, because of a total lie he came up with. Iraq might have had weapons of mass descrution. But they don't have that right now. Because of this stupid war.. people are dying everyday for no reason. Bush, himself is saying that the troops are soon going to being pulled out, when Iraq has a stable government. But that'll never happend.

My Father went to afghanistan as a peacekeeper for the war in Iraq. He was gone for 3 months at a time, would come home for one month, then go again for yet another 3 months. I hated seeing him leave. I wish this stupid war would end... I work at a Motophoto, and had to take passport pictures of all the army guys flying over there. I wanted to cry, it sucked.

Yes that is a dilema to go there any of these countries and these are wars that imposed upon with so many reasons and our army have to face problems rather than governament abd senators !