Crosswords1 min ago
War in Iraq
13 Answers
Hi, the other day my little sister asked me why we and America went to war with iraq, I could not answer the question as i did not know ! I have heard so many different reasons and theorys but still am not too sure. So here is what I need.
Some clever people to lay it out like an idiots guide.
Bullet point the main reasons with a bit of detail.
also was there any connection between Osama bin laden and saddem Hussein?
Some clever people to lay it out like an idiots guide.
Bullet point the main reasons with a bit of detail.
also was there any connection between Osama bin laden and saddem Hussein?
Answers
1 to 13 of 13
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by theleeroy55. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
September 11, 2001 - Twin towers destroyed, Pentagon and white house attacked.
Oct 2001 - War on Terror declared. OBLaden accused of organising 911. The officially-stated purpose of the invasion was to destroy al-Qaeda (OBL's organisation) and deny them sanctuary and freedom of movement within Afghanistan and to remove the Taliban regime which had provided support and haven to al-Qaeda. UK and US invade and make a wholly mess.
March 2003 - Bush administration announces they believe there are WMDs in Iraq which pose a threat to world safety. English and US troops invade. (This claim has now been proven false).
Saddam Hussein was overthrown, but we are failing to keep the country peaceful because civil war has broken out between Sunni and Shia Muslims, and al Qaeda operations are still ongoing in Iraq to destabalise the region.
BACKGROUND
Firstly, and most importantly, Saddam humiliated GWBush's father in the Gulf war (On August 2, 1990, Saddam invaded and annexed Kuwait, thus sparking an international crisis. The annexation of Kuwait gave Iraq, with its own substantial oil fields, control of 20 percent of the Persian Gulf reserves. The U.S. provided assistance to Saddam Hussein in the war with Iran, but with Iraq's seizure of the oil-rich emirate of Kuwait in August 1990 the United States led a United Nations coalition that drove Iraq's troops from Kuwait in February 1991.The Security Council imposed a deadline for Iraq to leave Kuwait, which Saddam ignored. The US invaded and in the end, the over-manned and under-equipped Iraqi army proved unable to compete on the battlefield with the highly mobile coalition land forces and their overpowering air support. Some 175,000 Iraqis were taken prisoner and casualties were estimated at over 85,000. As part of the cease-fire agreement, Iraq agreed to scrap all poison gas and germ weapons and allow UN observers to inspect the sites. UN trade sanctions would remain in effect until Iraq complied with all terms. Saddam publically claimed victory at the end of the war. Therefore, as a historical footnote, the outcome of the war is in dispute. From a practical standpoint, the Allies were successful in their goal of liberating Kuwait.)
OBL has long been wanted by the US, for issuing two fatwas�in 1996 and then again in 1998�that Muslims should kill civilians and military personnel from the United States and allied countries until they withdraw support for Israel and withdraw military forces from Islamic countries, and he has been indicted in United States federal court for his alleged involvement in the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and Nairobi, Kenya, and is on the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation's Ten Most Wanted Fugitives list.
Firstly, and most importantly, Saddam humiliated GWBush's father in the Gulf war (On August 2, 1990, Saddam invaded and annexed Kuwait, thus sparking an international crisis. The annexation of Kuwait gave Iraq, with its own substantial oil fields, control of 20 percent of the Persian Gulf reserves. The U.S. provided assistance to Saddam Hussein in the war with Iran, but with Iraq's seizure of the oil-rich emirate of Kuwait in August 1990 the United States led a United Nations coalition that drove Iraq's troops from Kuwait in February 1991.The Security Council imposed a deadline for Iraq to leave Kuwait, which Saddam ignored. The US invaded and in the end, the over-manned and under-equipped Iraqi army proved unable to compete on the battlefield with the highly mobile coalition land forces and their overpowering air support. Some 175,000 Iraqis were taken prisoner and casualties were estimated at over 85,000. As part of the cease-fire agreement, Iraq agreed to scrap all poison gas and germ weapons and allow UN observers to inspect the sites. UN trade sanctions would remain in effect until Iraq complied with all terms. Saddam publically claimed victory at the end of the war. Therefore, as a historical footnote, the outcome of the war is in dispute. From a practical standpoint, the Allies were successful in their goal of liberating Kuwait.)
OBL has long been wanted by the US, for issuing two fatwas�in 1996 and then again in 1998�that Muslims should kill civilians and military personnel from the United States and allied countries until they withdraw support for Israel and withdraw military forces from Islamic countries, and he has been indicted in United States federal court for his alleged involvement in the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and Nairobi, Kenya, and is on the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation's Ten Most Wanted Fugitives list.
THE REAL DEAL
Firstly, the invasion of Afghanistan came only a month after 911 - a logistical impossibility unless the attack had been planned before 911 happened.
GWBush wanted to go get OBLaden and SHussein for the reasons above.
Afghanistan and Iraq are both oil-rich countries.
Afghanistan and Iraq geographically encircle Iran - the nation that now poses the greatest threat to future world peace, and our troops are conveniently surrounding it.
Most distubingly, US troops are moving closer and closer to the Biblical "Holy Land", and GWBush has said that he thinks he is on a crusade for God...Be afraid!!!
Firstly, the invasion of Afghanistan came only a month after 911 - a logistical impossibility unless the attack had been planned before 911 happened.
GWBush wanted to go get OBLaden and SHussein for the reasons above.
Afghanistan and Iraq are both oil-rich countries.
Afghanistan and Iraq geographically encircle Iran - the nation that now poses the greatest threat to future world peace, and our troops are conveniently surrounding it.
Most distubingly, US troops are moving closer and closer to the Biblical "Holy Land", and GWBush has said that he thinks he is on a crusade for God...Be afraid!!!
after the 9/11 attacks it became pretty clear that al-Qaeda, which launched them, were based in Afghanistan and protected by the regime there, the Taliban. So the US, and others, invaded Afghanistan as a 'war on terror'. I think they actually did pretty well, overthrowing the Taliban and trying to get a more liberal democratic regime into power... but then they took their eye off the ball and decided to attack Iraq too.
They claimed Saddam was linked to al-Qaeda, and that he had weapons of mass destruction. Both of these claims were almost certainly quite wrong. (Saddam saw himself as an Arab leader, but a mostly secular one; I don't think he liked fundamentalists like Bin Laden, and he certainly didn't like them as potential rival Arab leaders.)
Another reason may have been family pride: Bush's father, when he was president himself, also went to war on Saddam, 'won', but left without toppling Saddam';so Bush junior may have felt there was unfinished business.
Oil may also be a reason. Iraq has lots of it and Bush, who's an oilman himself, would appreciate a steady, cheap supply from a tame, pro-western government.
Another reason, I believe was a quite genuine desire to bring democracy - American-style - to a country ruled by a tyrant.
Anyway, it all went wrong; and the Afghan occupation also went wrong; and now they're contemplating war on Iran as well, which suggests they haven't learnt much about the limits of power.
They claimed Saddam was linked to al-Qaeda, and that he had weapons of mass destruction. Both of these claims were almost certainly quite wrong. (Saddam saw himself as an Arab leader, but a mostly secular one; I don't think he liked fundamentalists like Bin Laden, and he certainly didn't like them as potential rival Arab leaders.)
Another reason may have been family pride: Bush's father, when he was president himself, also went to war on Saddam, 'won', but left without toppling Saddam';so Bush junior may have felt there was unfinished business.
Oil may also be a reason. Iraq has lots of it and Bush, who's an oilman himself, would appreciate a steady, cheap supply from a tame, pro-western government.
Another reason, I believe was a quite genuine desire to bring democracy - American-style - to a country ruled by a tyrant.
Anyway, it all went wrong; and the Afghan occupation also went wrong; and now they're contemplating war on Iran as well, which suggests they haven't learnt much about the limits of power.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
ha, yes, infundibulum is quite right, there is indeed a link between bin Laden and Saddam in that both, in earlier years, were funded by the west for its own purposes - Saddam for fighting Iran (which the US hated) and bin Laden for fighting Russia (which the US also hated) in Afghanistan. Both proved to be jolly ungrateful. But no actual connection to speak of between them.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing when looking at past decisions especially when going to war.
Most reasonable people would say the war has in Iraq has been a colossus mistake.
This suggests that all the reasons and theories should be consigned to the waste paper bin after documenting for future generations a path no country should ever follow, Instead we should emphasise the work done by specialists and the valid reasons in trying to solve the problem by peaceful means.
The Nobel peace prize should be awarded to Hans Blix the chief weapons inspector who tried in vain to prevent war.
Most reasonable people would say the war has in Iraq has been a colossus mistake.
This suggests that all the reasons and theories should be consigned to the waste paper bin after documenting for future generations a path no country should ever follow, Instead we should emphasise the work done by specialists and the valid reasons in trying to solve the problem by peaceful means.
The Nobel peace prize should be awarded to Hans Blix the chief weapons inspector who tried in vain to prevent war.
to be honest, kwicky, I would have thought the experience of the Vietnam war would have been enough to deter Washington from launching conflicts like this, in faraway countries they don't know much about; but they just thought they'd do it better this time. In fact things have gone differently - far fewer US casualties - but the result has been to spark civil war rather than end it as happened in Vietnam. Same amount of egg on face, however.
here's an article that lays it out quite well and is worth reading http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/oil/2003/ 2003companiesiniraq.htm just to add to all the good contributions on the thread so far.
I think we need to examine the psyche of the American nation. Because they are very successful in business with companies such as Microsoft, Boeing etc, dominating world markets, the capital being generated and the most wealthy individuals on the planet, they believe they can instill these values in any undeveloped country. But happiness to many does not always equate to being wealthy. For those Americans that aspire to wealth hardly conforms to 'the eye of the needle......going to heaven' prophecy. Many outsiders see the American way of life abhorant. They should keep these superficial values to themselves.
1 to 13 of 13
Latest Posts
Crosswords7 mins ago
Is There A Pro England Rally Today
News10 mins ago
Film, Media & TV13 mins ago
