Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: fortheDeclaration
We had every right to go in.

Even though we had every right to go in, did we have a compelling reason to invade at a cost of several thousands lives and hundreds of billions of dollars apart from the threat of WMDs?

85 posted on 10/20/2006 4:30:02 PM PDT by Young Scholar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies ]


To: Young Scholar
We had every right to go in. Even though we had every right to go in, did we have a compelling reason to invade at a cost of several thousands lives and hundreds of billions of dollars apart from the threat of WMDs?

Ofcourse we did!

We are in a war against terrorism, and Iraq was a leading exponent of it, supporting various groups.

87 posted on 10/20/2006 4:37:06 PM PDT by fortheDeclaration (Am I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth? (Gal.4:16))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies ]

To: Young Scholar
Even though we had every right to go in, did we have a compelling reason to invade at a cost of several thousands lives and hundreds of billions of dollars apart from the threat of WMDs?

Please try not to interpret history while it is being rewritten.

89 posted on 10/20/2006 4:38:24 PM PDT by Wormwood (Everybody lies, but it doesn't matter because nobody listens.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies ]

To: Young Scholar

Source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War
After the 1991 Gulf War, then-United States Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney reported that "Saddam Hussein's offensive military capability, his capacity to threaten his neighbors, has been virtually eliminated." Yet there was still much concern over Iraq's weapons programs, so United Nations Resolutions were passed to impose sanctions on the regime of Saddam Hussein until it was verified that its weapons of mass destruction were destroyed.

From April 1991 and the formation of UNSCOM, Iraq had been under ongoing pressure by the United Nations to declare and destroy its biological and chemical weapons. In total the UN had passed 13 resolutions calling for complete access of UNSCOM and IAEA officials to locate and destroy all weapons of mass destruction.[17]

Starting in the aftermath of the war and continuing until 1998, UNSCOM inspected Iraq, locating and destroying large quantities of chemical agents, nuclear-related equipment and other prohibited materials.[17][18][19] Conflict between Iraq and the UN developed during 1998, however, which led to the withdrawal of the UN and the authorization of a bombing campaign by the Clinton administration to "degrade Saddam's capacity to develop and deliver weapons of mass destruction, and to degrade his ability to threaten his neighbors".[20][21][22]

Furthermore, in November 1998, at the urging of President Bill Clinton, the U.S. House of Representatives and the US Senate passed the "Iraq Liberation Act of 1998," [23] which "declare[d] that it should be the policy of the United States to remove the Saddam Hussein regime from power in Iraq and to replace it with a democratic government." President Clinton signed this bill into law. It also stated that "nothing in this Act shall be construed to authorize or otherwise speak to the use of United States Armed Forces," instead calling for support of Iraqi opposition groups."


Beginning with a speech to the United Nations General Assembly on September 12, 2002 President George W. Bush began a public campaign to convince the world that Saddam Hussein was violating both the commitments he had made at the end of the First Gulf War and which prior UN resolutions dealt with: weapons of mass destruction, human rights, Kuwaiti prisoners of war, terrorism, long range SCUD missiles, the U.N. Oil-for-Food Programme and allowing UN inspectors to return to Iraq after their removal in 1998.[26]

Some members of the Bush administration implied a link between the Hussein government to the September 11, 2001 attacks, partly on the basis of an alleged meeting in Prague in April 2001 involving an Iraqi intelligence agent and other evidence.[27][28]. Both a Senate Select Committee and the 9/11 Commission failed to uncover convincing evidence of such a link, and specifically found no evidence of an Atta meeting in Prague.[29][30][31] (See also Atta in Prague and Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda).

On October 10, 2002 the 107th Congress of the United States passed HJ Res 114 titled "Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002." Among the reasons noted in the Congressional resolution authorizing force were Iraq's non-compliance with U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441,[32] aid to terrorists (PALF),[33][34] a 1993 assassination attempt on former President George H. W. Bush (George W. Bush's father)[35] and the Emir of Kuwait, in addition to violations of the no-fly zones.[36]

On February 5, 2003 Colin Powell attempted to convince the UN Security Council that Saddam Hussein's regime posed a significant and timely threat to international security.[45] The Bush administration also claimed that Iraq was allied with al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations, including the Palestinian Arab Liberation Front (PALF), Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Hezbollah.[46][47][48][49] Bush administration officials also claimed that Iraq was developing nuclear weapons.[50]



I know, YOUNG Scholar, that you could easily look this up on the Internet and discover for yourself the stated reasons. You can also find that the chief argument against the Bush Admin was "war for oil" and only when no WMD were found, was it "Bush Lied".

But, then, YOUNG Scholar, your probably already know these things, don't you?


95 posted on 10/20/2006 5:42:46 PM PDT by Prost1 (Fair and Unbiased as always!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson