You really should stop displaying your utter ignorance.
The October 2002, U.S. congress
Iraq War Resolution cited many factors to justify the use of military force against Iraq:
- Iraq's noncompliance with the conditions of the 1991 ceasefire agreement, including interference with U.N. weapons inspectors.
- Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction, and programs to develop such weapons, posed a "threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region."
- Iraq's "brutal repression of its civilian population."
- Iraq's "capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people".
- Iraq's hostility towards the United States as demonstrated by the 1993 assassination attempt on former President George H. W. Bush and firing on coalition aircraft enforcing the no-fly zones following the 1991 Gulf War.
- Members of Al-Qaeda, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq.
- Iraq's "continuing to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations," including anti-United States terrorist organizations.
- Iraq paid bounty to families of suicide bombers.
- The efforts by the Congress and the President to fight terrorists, including the September 11th, 2001 terrorists and those who aided or harbored them.
- The authorization by the Constitution and the Congress for the President to fight anti-United States terrorism.
- The governments in Turkey, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia feared Saddam and wanted him removed from power.
- Citing the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, the resolution reiterated that it should be the policy of the United States to remove the Saddam Hussein regime and promote a democratic replacement.
Rationale for the Iraq War - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
First point is hardly a justification for war otherwise we would be at war with Israel right now.
Second point turned out to be completely false, especially given the heavy emphasis placed on nuclear weapons and Niger yellow cake that turned out to be incredibly poor "intel"
Third point is true enough, but given what was going on at the time, not compelling. If we didn't intervene with the gassing of the Kurds, then their would be little enough in the way of justification to intervene when we did.
Fourth point True enough, but likewise not very timely, and thus not very compelling.
Fifth point: also not at all timely, nor compelling.
Sixth point coupled with the assertion that Iraq was supporting Al Qaeda was another one of the supposedly BIG issues and it also turned out to be completely fictitious.
Seventh point: you'll have to provide specific cases for me to address
Eighth point turned out to be completely false as well.
Ninth point is predicated on the other false point to be true and they weren't so this one turned out to be rather false as well
Tenth point: Not a compelling reason at all. "oh no country's have political rivals" is not a justification for war; otherwise we would currently be at war with most countries.
11th point also completely untimely and thus not compelling. It is an outdated casus belli from the 80s.