What do you think was the main reason for the US invasion of Iraq? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 17, 2024, 05:58:59 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  What do you think was the main reason for the US invasion of Iraq? (search mode)
Pages: [1] 2 3
Poll
Question: What do you think was the main reason for the US invasion of Iraq?
#1
Oil
 
#2
WMD's/Terrorism
 
#3
To protect Israel
 
#4
American Imperialism
 
#5
Personal for Bush(to prove to his dad)
 
#6
Other
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 83

Calculate results by number of options selected
Author Topic: What do you think was the main reason for the US invasion of Iraq?  (Read 26675 times)
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« on: June 12, 2010, 03:08:04 AM »

To remove Saddam Hussein, bring democracy to the Iraqi people, build schools, provide better rights for women, and build better homes for the less fortunate. The WMD were a small part that had to be sold to the UN because everyone knows they could care less about women's rights, children going to school, the homeless, and democracy. The few WMD that were thought to be there have been long since found and taken out of harming the innocent. The people of Iraq live a better life today because of a man with courage and his name is George Walker Bush!!!
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #1 on: June 12, 2010, 11:23:21 PM »

Where the hell did my post go? We went into Iraq to make the world a better place. Children are going to school. Citizens have the right to vote. Women are no longer abused or oppressed. No more mass graves or hangings. President Bush did the right thing even if it wasn't popular and because of that every night people thank God for him in their prayers. George Walker Bush did what he could to make the world a better place.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #2 on: June 12, 2010, 11:24:34 PM »

And if Obama were in the senate in 2002 to vote on the Iraq War, he would've voted present.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #3 on: June 13, 2010, 01:11:47 AM »

And if Obama were in the senate in 2002 to vote on the Iraq War, he would've voted present.

Well of course he would have, the scare tactics worked back then. Now that it's been almost 9 years with no significant terrorist attacks on American soil, people are started to become sane again, little by little.

Fort Hood was a terrorist attack whether you want to admit it or not.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #4 on: June 13, 2010, 01:12:23 AM »

And if Obama were in the senate in 2002 to vote on the Iraq War, he would've voted present.
No, he would have voted Yea.

Well he sure as hell voted present on the oil spill because it's still a disaster.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #5 on: June 13, 2010, 01:32:31 AM »

2 and 5.

I think Bush honestly believed Saddam had WMD, but I also believe it was payback for the assassination attempt in...1992?

And if Obama were in the senate in 2002 to vote on the Iraq War, he would've voted present.

Well of course he would have, the scare tactics worked back then. Now that it's been almost 9 years with no significant terrorist attacks on American soil, people are started to become sane again, little by little.

Fort Hood was a terrorist attack whether you want to admit it or not.

It was, just like the IRS plane crash.

And if Obama were in the senate in 2002 to vote on the Iraq War, he would've voted present.
No, he would have voted Yea.

Well he sure as hell voted present on the oil spill because it's still a disaster.

lolwut?  Vote on the oil spill...Do you think before you write?

Also, why do you have to post numerous times in the same topic?  You reply to yourself.  I swear, I think you have a mental illness.

I was being sarcastic about voting present on the oil spill. What IRS plane crash do you mean? As far as payback? I think an assassination attempt on a former president is grounds for removing someone from power. I would've loved to see him move on that front.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #6 on: June 13, 2010, 07:51:00 PM »

2 and 5.

I think Bush honestly believed Saddam had WMD, but I also believe it was payback for the assassination attempt in...1992?

And if Obama were in the senate in 2002 to vote on the Iraq War, he would've voted present.

Well of course he would have, the scare tactics worked back then. Now that it's been almost 9 years with no significant terrorist attacks on American soil, people are started to become sane again, little by little.

Fort Hood was a terrorist attack whether you want to admit it or not.

It was, just like the IRS plane crash.

And if Obama were in the senate in 2002 to vote on the Iraq War, he would've voted present.
No, he would have voted Yea.

Well he sure as hell voted present on the oil spill because it's still a disaster.

lolwut?  Vote on the oil spill...Do you think before you write?

Also, why do you have to post numerous times in the same topic?  You reply to yourself.  I swear, I think you have a mental illness.

The assasination attempt was in 1993. And as for the WMDs, Saddam allowed the U.N. insectors to return to Iraq right before the invasion. Instead of allowing the inspectors to do their job, Bush Jr. proceeded with the invasion anyway. Also, his ultimatum to Saddam said nothing about WMDs or U.N. inspectors. It just told Saddam and his sons to leave the country within 48 hours. Thus, Bush Jr.'s goal in the Iraq invasion was regime change, along with a desire to get reelected. No wonder he tricked Kerry and many other Democrats to vote for the Iraq invasion. Then, when Kerry started being against the war, Bush managed to attack him as a flip-flopper and someone with poor-judgmenet and credibility. Also, the Iraq War helped Bush scare off any stronger potential competitors (such as Hillary) and made his swiftboating attacks on Kerry much more credible. Finally, I think Bush Jr. thought that the main reasons (other than the poor economy) for why his dad was not reelected were ebcause he raised taxes and because he did not remove Saddam. THus, Bush Jr. wanted to avoid his dad's mistakes.

That sounds pretty brilliant but too conspiracy like. The $100 billion and the $87 billion did allow Bush to portray his competition as flip-floppers but let's face it they did it to themselves. I mean come on, have you seen the video where Kerry says he voted for the $87 billion before he voted against it? Swiftboating was done separately so by throwing Former President Bush's name in their you are either misleading people or you don't know what you are talking about. You think Iraq helped Bush get reelected? In terms of handling it, it may have swung some independent votes, but it also motivated the left who was against Iraq from day 1. He avoided his dad's mistakes which was good. You also pointed out that the 48 hour ultimatum had nothing to do with WMD so perhaps WMD really wasn't Bush's biggest reason. I believe that he wanted to build schools, give rights to women, end oppression, and remove Saddam who tried to assassinate a former US President.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #7 on: June 14, 2010, 12:30:03 PM »

Easy he wanted to prove daddy wrong. I will never forget in the 2004 debates when Kerry used Sr's own words agains Dubya. Sr. wrote in his autobioraphy that the reason he didnt take Saddam out was that it would have created an imbalance of power through out the region between the sunni, and shiite countries, a power vaccum through out Iraq and U.S. forces would be seen as bitter occupiers  in a hostile enviroment with no exit strategy. Hmm daddy was kinda prophetic.

Anyone could've seen that. Bush Sr. was very much correct. What was the right thing to do though? Bush Jr. did just that. Remember too that Bush Sr. said that before Saddam tried to have him assassinated in 1993. Bush Sr. may have changed his mind after that. I know I would.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #8 on: June 14, 2010, 12:53:16 PM »

Strategic domination of middle east, oil, and opportunity to steal from treasury.

No and you're just quoting the democrats. If it were about oil, then Bush would've lifted the sanctions on Iraq so that the U.S. could've bought their oil at market price. Instead he went to war to take out a middle eastern Adolf Hitler and encouraged drilling in Alaska.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #9 on: June 14, 2010, 06:42:49 PM »

Easy he wanted to prove daddy wrong. I will never forget in the 2004 debates when Kerry used Sr's own words agains Dubya. Sr. wrote in his autobioraphy that the reason he didnt take Saddam out was that it would have created an imbalance of power through out the region between the sunni, and shiite countries, a power vaccum through out Iraq and U.S. forces would be seen as bitter occupiers  in a hostile enviroment with no exit strategy. Hmm daddy was kinda prophetic.

Anyone could've seen that. Bush Sr. was very much correct. What was the right thing to do though? Bush Jr. did just that. Remember too that Bush Sr. said that before Saddam tried to have him assassinated in 1993. Bush Sr. may have changed his mind after that. I know I would.

Then maybe if we had adhered to daddy's words a half million people would still be alive, and we wouldnt have spent a trillion dollars.

Stop using the lost lives in Iraq to advance your own political agenda.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #10 on: June 14, 2010, 06:44:22 PM »

Strategic domination of middle east, oil, and opportunity to steal from treasury.

No and you're just quoting the democrats. If it were about oil, then Bush would've lifted the sanctions on Iraq so that the U.S. could've bought their oil at market price. Instead he went to war to take out a middle eastern Adolf Hitler and encouraged drilling in Alaska.

Again lol as much as I hate to say it I have to agree with Derek  about the part about oil. It was never about oil. People dont realize that we dont get alot of oil from the middle east. We get most of our oil from Venezula, and Canada.

Iraq was producing a lot of oil under Saddam though, and even after we removed Sadam it was still the Iraqis' oil. Thus, what was in it for the U.S.?

If it really was about oil, then Bush would've had the sanctions against Saddam and we would've bought the oil at market price. It never was about oil and never will be.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #11 on: June 14, 2010, 06:51:04 PM »

Im trying to figure out what political agenda I have. I am just against illegally invading a soverign nation.

Illegal according to whom? Sovereign according to whom? Sometimes doing the right thing is above doing what is legal according to the UN.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #12 on: June 15, 2010, 01:55:36 AM »

Sovereignty is the quality of having supreme, independent authority over a territory. It can be found in a power to rule and make law that rests on a political fact for which no purely legal explanation can be provided. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_nation

The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq violates the basic rules of the United Nations Charter requiring countries to exhaust all peaceful means of maintaining global security before taking military action, and permitting the use of force in self-defense only in response to actual or imminent attack.

Soverign nation, illegal invasion.

Violates a UN Charter? what a crime. We had congressional and UN approval. F! the French, Germans, and Chinese. France was getting oil from Iraq at 4 cents a barrel. For them, it was only about oil.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #13 on: June 15, 2010, 09:57:41 AM »

Sovereignty is the quality of having supreme, independent authority over a territory. It can be found in a power to rule and make law that rests on a political fact for which no purely legal explanation can be provided. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_nation

The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq violates the basic rules of the United Nations Charter requiring countries to exhaust all peaceful means of maintaining global security before taking military action, and permitting the use of force in self-defense only in response to actual or imminent attack.

Soverign nation, illegal invasion.

Violates a UN Charter? what a crime. We had congressional and UN approval. F! the French, Germans, and Chinese. France was getting oil from Iraq at 4 cents a barrel. For them, it was only about oil.

Nope the U.N. did not approve Bush's illegal war.

You nay sayers were only about one thing and that's oil. Look at the French getting their oil barrels at 4 cents a barrel. You're right they loved that price and so they opposed the war.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #14 on: June 15, 2010, 03:58:05 PM »

Sovereignty is the quality of having supreme, independent authority over a territory. It can be found in a power to rule and make law that rests on a political fact for which no purely legal explanation can be provided. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_nation

The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq violates the basic rules of the United Nations Charter requiring countries to exhaust all peaceful means of maintaining global security before taking military action, and permitting the use of force in self-defense only in response to actual or imminent attack.

Soverign nation, illegal invasion.

Violates a UN Charter? what a crime. We had congressional and UN approval. F! the French, Germans, and Chinese. France was getting oil from Iraq at 4 cents a barrel. For them, it was only about oil.

Nope the U.N. did not approve Bush's illegal war.

You nay sayers were only about one thing and that's oil. Look at the French getting their oil barrels at 4 cents a barrel. You're right they loved that price and so they opposed the war.

In France, they call Bush "the Asshole." I'm completely serious.

Your point? Look if you want to go live in France I'm not holding you back. That's one less person who votes democrat in the elections.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #15 on: June 15, 2010, 10:48:31 PM »

Sovereignty is the quality of having supreme, independent authority over a territory. It can be found in a power to rule and make law that rests on a political fact for which no purely legal explanation can be provided. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_nation

The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq violates the basic rules of the United Nations Charter requiring countries to exhaust all peaceful means of maintaining global security before taking military action, and permitting the use of force in self-defense only in response to actual or imminent attack.

Soverign nation, illegal invasion.

Violates a UN Charter? what a crime. We had congressional and UN approval. F! the French, Germans, and Chinese. France was getting oil from Iraq at 4 cents a barrel. For them, it was only about oil.

Nope the U.N. did not approve Bush's illegal war.

You nay sayers were only about one thing and that's oil. Look at the French getting their oil barrels at 4 cents a barrel. You're right they loved that price and so they opposed the war.

In France, they call Bush "the Asshole." I'm completely serious.

Your point? Look if you want to go live in France I'm not holding you back. That's one less person who votes democrat in the elections.

My point is that the naysayers didn't want America spending its money on invading a country that posed no immedaite threat to us. It's not like we have money to spare. And the international community felt that Saddam should remain in power because he was minding his own business and not invading or threatening anybody.

The word international means global and the word community means a small area of individuals who hold a similar set of beliefs, values, and ideas. Don't you see how putting the 2 terms together is an oxymoron? I don't much care what other countries think in that case because if they were able to look past what Saddam was doing then they really did have their heads up their asses.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #16 on: June 16, 2010, 01:10:33 PM »

Sovereignty is the quality of having supreme, independent authority over a territory. It can be found in a power to rule and make law that rests on a political fact for which no purely legal explanation can be provided. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_nation

The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq violates the basic rules of the United Nations Charter requiring countries to exhaust all peaceful means of maintaining global security before taking military action, and permitting the use of force in self-defense only in response to actual or imminent attack.

Soverign nation, illegal invasion.

Violates a UN Charter? what a crime. We had congressional and UN approval. F! the French, Germans, and Chinese. France was getting oil from Iraq at 4 cents a barrel. For them, it was only about oil.

Nope the U.N. did not approve Bush's illegal war.

You nay sayers were only about one thing and that's oil. Look at the French getting their oil barrels at 4 cents a barrel. You're right they loved that price and so they opposed the war.

In France, they call Bush "the Asshole." I'm completely serious.

Your point? Look if you want to go live in France I'm not holding you back. That's one less person who votes democrat in the elections.

My point is that the naysayers didn't want America spending its money on invading a country that posed no immedaite threat to us. It's not like we have money to spare. And the international community felt that Saddam should remain in power because he was minding his own business and not invading or threatening anybody.

The word international means global and the word community means a small area of individuals who hold a similar set of beliefs, values, and ideas. Don't you see how putting the 2 terms together is an oxymoron? I don't much care what other countries think in that case because if they were able to look past what Saddam was doing then they really did have their heads up their asses.

Hmm were there ied's, under Saddam? Did a half million people lose there life in 7 years since we took over? Answer me that? And look whats going on in Saudi, Iran, China, North Korea, Sudan, Congo, why didnt we go there? If your so worried about the poor Iraq's why dont you do something about and join the army? I bet you would be screaming to the high heavens about you dont wanna go then. Your such a false patriot. Ya your all about waving the flag and national defense as long as you dont have to do it, just like Bush, Cheney, Rush, Rove, all the people that tell you what to beleive.

Yes what you're doing is pointing the finger everywhere but Iraq to make Bush look bad. Had Bush gone after Iran, we'd be pointing towards Iraq.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #17 on: June 16, 2010, 01:12:24 PM »

For the 31 who said "oil".......can you please tell me where the hell it's at?

Probably hidden somewhere on Dubya's ranch

It must be.....because a war for oil for the rest of us, it wasn't.

The argument that I heard from the oil conspiracy theorists was that the war was to remove Iraq's oil from the market permanently, thus jacking up the price of oil further and making the oil companies a nice mint by taking a source of oil offline: the more limited the amount of oil, the higher the price, and the larger the profits.  Note that I don't buy that theory any more than the other one, but that effect certainly occurred.

If it were about oil, then we would've just taken it from Iraq and sold it for less because it would be making a profit off of someone else's oil. We didn't do that because if we did then we wouldn't have been paying $3.50 a gallon 2 years ago.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #18 on: June 16, 2010, 01:26:46 PM »

The media wants you to connect Iraq with oil, oil with Bush, and Bush wit a war in Iraq for oil. It's alot more intellectually indepth than that and it's not the case.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #19 on: June 16, 2010, 07:05:26 PM »

I'm all in favor of invading Iran.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #20 on: June 17, 2010, 11:18:32 PM »

I'm all in favor of invading Iran.
LOL I am sure you be but in order to get the troops to fight three wars and maintain our presence elsewhere, your gonna have to have a draft which means CHEERLEADERS like you are gonna have to be a man and go fight. You willing to do that?

Hey Bush was a cheerleader and he became president.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #21 on: June 18, 2010, 06:31:15 PM »


To be honest when I spoke to recruiters they told me that I couldn't join because of all the medications I'm on.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #22 on: June 21, 2010, 12:17:37 PM »

Again, the real reason is that Bush wanted to promote women's rights, give children a chance to go to school, and bring freedom to those less fortunate. He tried to advocate those things here but the democrats were too high and mighty to listen.
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #23 on: June 22, 2010, 10:45:09 AM »

Again, the real reason is that Bush wanted to promote women's rights, give children a chance to go to school, and bring freedom to those less fortunate. He tried to advocate those things here but the democrats were too high and mighty to listen.
Quit posting the same crap over and over. Women had more rights in Iraq than other Mideast country genius, and Kids go to school there. And ya there life is so better, the city of Nassariah hasnt had power in 7 years.

come on
Logged
Derek
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,615
United States


« Reply #24 on: June 22, 2010, 04:53:09 PM »

Again, the real reason is that Bush wanted to promote women's rights, give children a chance to go to school, and bring freedom to those less fortunate. He tried to advocate those things here but the democrats were too high and mighty to listen.

Many Democrats did listen. That's why almost half the Democrats in the House and a majority of Democrats in the Senate voted for the war. Oh, and those ideas are great and all, but again we shouldn't spend our money on that, especially when we're in a deficit.

Plus they violated UN sanctions, DID have WMD, and tried to assassinate Bush Sr.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.054 seconds with 14 queries.