How is Iraq connected to the war on terror?

[Gunny]

Junior admitted Iraq had nothing to do with 911. The war to Iraq is just based on a story. That's it, a fiction Junior and team made up.

No one but you leftwingnuts ever thought Saddam was directly linked to 9/1/1.

As for your claim that I'm naive, try and answer the following questions. Eisenhower warned this country about the military industrial complex.

What do you think the warning signs will be that such a complex is heading our way? What do you suppose the red flags will look like?

Would it look like people that worked for government moving on to the private companies that deals with military contracts and later move back to work for government that deals with contracts with private companies? And somehow it just seems to work out that war gets started.

You obviously didn't see my post on Cheney and the first gulf war.

I saw your post. It was abunch of slanted bullshit, much like your post in this thread.

DMP is WAY too kind, IMO. You aren't naive.....you're an idiot, and a left-wing hater crusader. Nothing more nor less.

 

[MissileMan]

The reason I listed countries is to show that we didn't invade the others. We chose Iraq. What I'm looking for is the stepping stone that goes from Afghan to Iraq. Why couldn't it wait until the conflict in Afghan was over and what Iraq had to do with the War on Terror prior to invasion and the Mission Accomplished event. You are going to have to do better than "had terrorist relations." Damn near every third world country that I have seen has had terrorist relations.

Saddam had WMDs by his own admission. One of the goals of the WOT is to keep WMDs out of terrorists' hands. While Saddam might have felt his secular regime was threatened by Islamic fundamentalists, I have no doubt whatsoever that he would have provided AQ with WMDs with which to attack us.

Based on this and based on the fact that we already had quite a substantial military presence in and around Iraq, it made perfect sense logistically and strategically to go into Iraq when we did.

 

[manu1959]

There has been much debate on this board about this, but as yet, I have not seen anyone present a strong case for either side. Please don't turn this into a catfight and please keep the debate informative.

How is the War in Iraq connected to the War on Terrorism. Has anything been gained against terrorists that would not have been gained had we not invaded? What are the advantages to staying the course over pulling out?

saddam was funding terrorist, money for suicide bombers families...

saddam had at leastone terrorist traing camp with a full size jet to train hijackers...

saddam had known terrorists in his country...

saddam was himself a terrorist killing his own citizens.....

now was that enough to invade and depose him...i say no

but we went and created a situation that we have a responsibilty to see out

 

[trobinett]

Here's the reasons we went into Iraq.

1. WMDs. We know he had them. The libs won't admit it, but it's true. He was also crazy enough to use them, as we saw in the Gulf War.

2. Violation of U.N. sanctions. Iraq had violated dozens of sanctions, each of which carried the stipulation that violating them would constitute an act of war. As impotent as the U.N. is, it's even more impotent when the U.S. doesn't enforce their sanctions.

3. Weakness. The armies of Saddam were weak and easily folded under the weight of the awesome and terrible power that is the United States armed forces. Of all the targets we could have hit, this one was the ripest for the picking.

4. Demonstration of Power and Resolve. After the initial invasion and demonstration of our strength and swiftness, several countries and terrorist groups were quick to submit to our rules. This effect, however, has all but died out, thanks to the left's determination to turn all public opinion against military action.

5. Pinch Iran. Iran is the world capitol of terrorism. It was concieved in the West Bank and born in Munich, but it is based in Tehran. From the beginning, we knew that this would culminate in a grand battle against Iran, our first enemy in the long standing conflict between the United States and Islamic fascism. If you look on a world map, you will notice that Iraq and Afghanistan are located on opposite sides of Iran. When that battle comes, we are in perfect position to crush the Iranian army between the might of our combined forces as a vice would crush a tomato.

I like it, and the great thing? There isn't any rush on OUR part.

Let 'em steam for awhile longer..............

Good post Hobbit....

 

[jillian]

Can we agree that the terrorists are there because of us? They are there to fight us and the only way to get rid of them would be a Sherman type "total war?"

.

Absolutely.

Absolutely. So does Pakistan, Libya, Egypt, Syria, and the United States.

Yes. And the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis trained in Afghanistan.

Yet we weren't attacked by Hezbollah. We were attacked by Al Quaida.

True.

This is true, but this wasn't uncovered until after the invasion

It also isn't a reason for dedicating the level of resources we have.

What is wrong with surgical air strikes?

They had kept him under control prior.... and let's not forget that the inspectors had finally resolved their access issues and were on the ground and uncovered more weapons than we have since the invasion.

I agree. This is my opinion as well, but foreign policy shouldn't be formed by opinion.

Nor should countries be invaded and occupied because we don't like the leadership. If anyone ever deposed the head of this country, we'd fight them even if we hated the leader... simply because no one should be invading our country whom we didn't attack.

I'd also point out that the training camps which were mentioned were in Kurdistan and outside of Saddam's jurisdiction.

And for Kathianne.... yes, Saddam gave incentives to people whose family members committed suicide attacks.... in Israel, on Israelis... not on U.S. Citizens.

Last points... Saddam stood between Iran and the type of power and standing in the region it has now. He hated the fundies and didn't permit any loony-toons to exercise power in his borders. (Not to mention the fact that we helped create him when he fought our proxy war against Iran for us).

 

[dilloduck]

If anyone ever deposed the head of this country, we'd fight them even if we hated the leader...

You may be gaining some insight as to why liberals are hated so !

 

[Said1]

Junior admitted Iraq had nothing to do with 911. The war to Iraq is just based on a story. That's it, a fiction Junior and team made up.

As for your claim that I'm naive, try and answer the following questions. Eisenhower warned this country about the military industrial complex.

What do you think the warning signs will be that such a complex is heading our way? What do you suppose the red flags will look like?

Would it look like people that worked for government moving on to the private companies that deals with military contracts and later move back to work for government that deals with contracts with private companies? And somehow it just seems to work out that war gets started.

You obviously didn't see my post on Cheney and the first gulf war.

Didn't need to, most have cable, the documentary was on tv the other day.

 

[Gunny]

Then why wasn't this given as a reason for invasion. This has nothing to do with terrorism and doesn't connect the dots as pertinent to my original question.



Why Iraq? Pakistan had terrorist relations and was probably harboring Bin Laden at the time of the Iraqi invasion. Terrorist relations could be used as an excuse to invade the world, yet we don't. Relations don't connect Iraq to the WOT. We were told that Saddam was an inevitable threat to the US. He wasn't.



Contained is not captured. It is not brought to trial, as was promised.



I agree. I am not against the War in Iraq in any way, shape, or form. I simply would like to know what it has to do with the WOT.

I can see I need to revisit the original question. You asked a simple question with a simple answer, and I responded. It seems however that you want justification; which, I was not responding to.

As I stated previously, there were several reasons given to justify the invasion of Iraq. One, Saddam did not comply and repeatedly violated the terms of the ceasefire. Two, Saddam refused to comply with weapons inspectors, and leg them on a 13 year wild goose chase. He could not account for TONS of chemical/biological weapons making agents.

Saddam continually rattled his saber. Clinton pretended he didn't exist. Bush did not not. I do not mention that as an indictment against Clinton per se; rather, as an explanation for the time lapse between the Desert Storm and finally resolving the issue.

Don't know about where you're from, but around here if you challenge a redneck to a fight, you better be prepared to get down. Bush is from "around here."

Saddam was a threat to any and every nation within the ME region, several of whom we have defense treaties with.

Anyone who did not believe Saddam posessed, and was pursuing more WMDs is either a partisan hack or a blind fool. You choose. He used chemical weapons against both the Kurds and Iran; which, goes to intent AND posession. He couldn't very well use them without posessing them first. I could see possibly giving him the benefit of doubt did he not have a proven track record where the issue is concerned.

Saddam tied up a good portion of our military and defense budget for 13+ years.

He supported terrorist organizations, period. Picking and choosing who did what is playing semantics. Bush did not declare war against AQ. He declared war against terrorists and terrorism, period.

Why pick and choose which enemies to engage? Common sense dictates one at a time is far easier than all at once. SOund strategy and tactics.

As far as the US playing cozy with and turning a blind eye to foreign governments with ties to terrorists, that's politics. I don't agree with it and would not do it myself; however, nobody voted me in as Prez. To imply however that Bush is somehow doing anything other than "business as usual" carrying on his predecessors' game, is dishonest. ANd please note that I did not accuse you specifically of doing so.

You cannot say Saddam was not an inevitable threat to the US. What you can say is he was not an immediate threat to the US in the three minutes to go, Cold War sense of the word.

He was however an immediate threat to more than one nation the US was and is treaty-bound to defend. And if you want to play ostrich, then the civility of the argument ends here because the fact is anyone who thinks Saddam was not out to obtain nuclear weapons is a blind fool.

Capturing Saddam was NEVER part of the original agreement between the US and the other coalition, ME nations. Expelling Saddam from Kuwait was. In fact, had President Bush not agreed to not pursue Saddam beyond his borders once expelled, we would not have had unrestricted use of ME airspace, nor an air force base in Saudi Arabia.

Finally, I was on the gorund in Kuwait. Had you seen what Saddam's people dd to Kuwaiti noncombatants simply for being between him and what he wanted, you would probably agree that simply killing him would be far better than he deserves. The man is inhuman and deserves a fate worse than death.

You can call that an emotional response if you want. I don't care. I'd cut his throat with a K-Bar and not think twice about it.

Then we can go geopolitical. If our plan plays out in Iraq, we will hve succeeded in turning a hostile regime into an ally, and further alientated the Islamofascist nations.

So, WOT or not, kicking that scumbag's ass was simply the right thing to do. As far as selectivity goes, I'm all for doing the rest of 'em too while we're at it. We didn't get dressed up for nothing'!

 

[Gunny]

.

Absolutely.

Wrong. They were there beforehand.


Yes. And the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis trained in Afghanistan.

Irrelevant. They were Islamic fundamentalists bent on spreading their message through murder. Which Arab nation they specifically originated from doesn't mean squat.

Matter of fact, I don't recall you lefites making any real big deal about the fact that Arafat was an Egyptian and not a so-called Palestinian.


True.

We were attacked by militant Islamic fundamentalists bent on spreading their brand of hate through violence. What each group calls itself is irrelevant.


It also isn't a reason for dedicating the level of resources we have.

You fight a war to win, not conserve resources. We should have committed MORE.


They had kept him under control prior.... and let's not forget that the inspectors had finally resolved their access issues and were on the ground and uncovered more weapons than we have since the invasion.

Bull. Inspectors had "resovled" their issues with Saddam more than once and it always inevitably led to the same old shell game. The fact that you are willing to accept it as truth this time just speaks fo where you are coming from politically.


Nor should countries be invaded and occupied because we don't like the leadership. If anyone ever deposed the head of this country, we'd fight them even if we hated the leader... simply because no one should be invading our country whom we didn't attack.

I'd also point out that the training camps which were mentioned were in Kurdistan and outside of Saddam's jurisdiction.

And for Kathianne.... yes, Saddam gave incentives to people whose family members committed suicide attacks.... in Israel, on Israelis... not on U.S. Citizens.

Last points... Saddam stood between Iran and the type of power and standing in the region it has now. He hated the fundies and didn't permit any loony-toons to exercise power in his borders. (Not to mention the fact that we helped create him when he fought our proxy war against Iran for us).

Ruthless pieces of shit should be deposed, period. It is wrong to turn a blind eye to genocidal and/or homicidal maniacs running nations. Every one ignored Hitler and look what happened before he was finally addressed as a threat to the world.

Saddam gave money to families of terrorists who committed murder in the name of their religion. End of story. It doesn't matter WHO they murdered.

Your last point is only somehat valid. Even as Saddam pretended to be our friend while he was at war with Iran, so too was he willing to support any and all attacks, to include those from fundamental islamofascists, against the US once we became his "Enemy #1." He already had a track of operating under the "the enemy of my enemy is my friend so long as it suits me" principle. Whether or not he would have turned on them later is irrelevant conjecture.

 

[Psychoblues]

Another thread almost completely void of reality and continues to avoid the subject. WAR IS HARD. Get some genuine facts and get back with those of us that genuinely appreciate them.

GeeWhiz, I think they swalowed the KoolAid.

Psychoblues

 

[Stephanie]

Another thread almost completely void of reality and continues to avoid the subject. WAR IS HARD. Get some genuine facts and get back with those of us that genuinely appreciate them.

GeeWhiz, I think they swalowed the KoolAid.

Psychoblues

:sleepy1:

 

[Gunny]

Another thread almost completely void of reality and continues to avoid the subject. WAR IS HARD. Get some genuine facts and get back with those of us that genuinely appreciate them.

GeeWhiz, I think they swalowed the KoolAid.

Psychoblues

I thought Cheese Whiz was your replacement for posting unsupported arguments and left-wingnut rhetoric.

 

[Said1]

I thought Cheese Whiz was your replacement for posting unsupported arguments and left-wingnut rhetoric.

References to documentaries, poli sci 101 lectures and other threads DO count you know.

 

[Gunny]

References to documentaries, poli sci 101 lectures and other threads DO count you know.

As well as any quotes from Alan Colmes?

 

[nt250]

Junior admitted Iraq had nothing to do with 911. The war to Iraq is just based on a story. That's it, a fiction Junior and team made up.

As for your claim that I'm naive, try and answer the following questions. Eisenhower warned this country about the military industrial complex.

What do you think the warning signs will be that such a complex is heading our way? What do you suppose the red flags will look like?

Would it look like people that worked for government moving on to the private companies that deals with military contracts and later move back to work for government that deals with contracts with private companies? And somehow it just seems to work out that war gets started.

You obviously didn't see my post on Cheney and the first gulf war.

Are you an American? If you are, would you please stop referring to our president as "Junior"? His name is George Walker Bush and he is not a "junior". His fathers name is George Herbert Walker Bush. If you are going to criticize a man, you should at least get the simple facts of his name straight.

If you are not an American, then bend over, kiss my ass, and thank your lucky stars that America exists. Because no matter where you live anywhere in this world, you have us to thank for the freedom that allows you to be an asshole on a message board.

 

[RyzinEnagy]

Another thread almost completely void of reality and continues to avoid the subject. WAR IS HARD. Get some genuine facts and get back with those of us that genuinely appreciate them.

GeeWhiz, I think they swalowed the KoolAid.

Psychoblues

Why are the liberals that come on this board so devoid of information but chock full of insults?

Are all liberals like this?

 

[nt250]

Why are the liberals that come on this board so devoid of information but chock full of insults?

Are all liberals like this?

Yes

 

[Jennifer.Bush]

saddam had known terrorists in his country...

t

that's not what the sen intell said

 

[Said1]

that's not what the sen intell said

What did it say?

 

[trobinett]

Another thread almost completely void of reality and continues to avoid the subject. WAR IS HARD. Get some genuine facts and get back with those of us that genuinely appreciate them.

GeeWhiz, I think they swalowed the KoolAid.

Psychoblues

You are so unconnected.

Your post is the ONLY post void of reality, and YOUR the only one that continues to avoid the subject, what ever it might be.

Damn right war is hard, how long did you think about THAT?

You wouldn't know a GENUINE FACT if it slapped you in the face.

The only people on this board sipping KOOLAID is you, and your handlers.