Why Did the Bush Administration Really Decide to Invade Iraq?

National Security.org ^ | 07.12.03

[Mr. K]

We had such weak arguments... the killing and torturing of his own people, and sponsoring terrorism was NOT enough to kill that b@stard...

Geez liberals are pathetic...

[Onelifetogive]

Why Did the Bush Administration Really Decide to Invade Iraq?

Because it would cause the Democrats to make a$$es out of themselves!

[samuel_adams_us]

Or are they using the war to keep our attention focused somewhere else whilst our government officials fill their pockets with cash and send our jobs overseas?

[RasterMaster]

Reason #1: The U.N.'s incapability to enforce it's own resolutions since Bush 41.

[eyespysomething]

dam democrats. I was just getting started on his spending, ie Medicare Prescription Bill, and the Dems had to go and start a false smoke screen to change the conversation. Now I have to struggle to change the topic back, and to make sure I get all new info.

Bush's spending...that's my sticking point.


But it's not like I'd vote dem.

[JohnGalt]

Hardly looks like a liberal outfit:

http://www.national-security.org/issues.shtml


but then you asserted a liberal cause for intervention ("the killing and torturing of his own people") in your post so I take it you were either being ironic or being absurd.

[Little Ray]

To make a example of an established ME state as to what will happen if they continue to pursue WMD and state terrorism.

Worked, too.

[boris]

The justification is 9/11/2001. Personally I would not have "done" Iraq first. Clearly, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and N. Korea should have been "done" first.

What Iraq shows is the folly of 'boots on the ground'. There really is a potential quagmire.

So nuke 'em, Dano, and move on to the next target.

--Boris

[Semper Paratus]

I don't know, why did Clinton bomb Sudan?

[LOC1]

Let's see......for the first time in a long time, there is some progress being made on peace between Israel and the Palestinians....there have been real signs of revolution in Iran against the radical Islamic government.....the Saudis have finally begun rounding up Al Quaeda members.....and Sadam is not murdering his own people anymore. Sounds like maybe the removal of that regime and insertion of US forces had a pretty good effect.

[Enemy Of The State]

Im with you on that one!

[IncPen]

The US (and if you care about them, the UN) told Iraq in no uncertain terms: disarm, or prove that you have, or we're coming in.

They didn't, so we did.

End of story.

Why is that so hard to understand?

[kevao]

I thought the invasion was all about yellowcake. Not that that's fallen through, I feel very misled. /sarcasm

[bandleader]

The "LiboCrites"remind me of what my late wife,Elizabeth used to say was one of my primary faults!She used to say that I spent far too much time figuring out reasons why I shouldn't do something than just getting on with it!!!!!

[ASA Vet]

QUAGMIRE ALERT!

[sergeantdave]

We invaded Iraq so Disneyland Middle-east could be built, complete with the Terrorist Bomber roller coaster attraction, to recruit cute Iraqi babes for colleges here and get them on the cheer leading team and to assure that we have enough sand to pack up the butts of French surrender monkeys.

Twits.

[VRWC_minion]

This article sounds like good reasons to me.

[Sacajaweau]

Why is everyone so certain that there wasn't an "imminent" threat". All it would take is a "suitcase" delivered to another idiot wanting 72 virgins. Connecting all the dots is difficult enough AFTER a disastor as we know.

Being WISE is even more difficult. The option of "as soon as they hit us, we can hit them back" is absurd given the history of Saddam and the possibility of Usama or Palestinian help.

[VRWC_minion]

Or are they using the war to keep our attention focused somewhere else whilst our government officials fill their pockets with cash and send our jobs overseas?

Like a diversion is needed ? Since when did corrupt officials care who was watching ?