Skip to comments.
Why Did the Bush Administration Really Decide to Invade Iraq?
National Security.org ^
| 07.12.03
Posted on 07/23/2003 8:02:37 AM PDT by Enemy Of The State
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-102 next last
To: Enemy Of The State
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...
2
posted on
07/23/2003 8:05:24 AM PDT
by
Mr. K
(VEY series about everything)
To: Enemy Of The State
Why Did the Bush Administration Really Decide to Invade Iraq?Because it would cause the Democrats to make a$$es out of themselves!
To: Mr. K
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?
To: Enemy Of The State
Reason #1: The U.N.'s incapability to enforce it's own resolutions since Bush 41.
5
posted on
07/23/2003 8:09:51 AM PDT
by
RasterMaster
(Saddam's family was a WMD)
To: samuel_adams_us
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.
6
posted on
07/23/2003 8:10:57 AM PDT
by
eyespysomething
(Would someone please tell them to SHUT UP already!)
To: Mr. K
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.
7
posted on
07/23/2003 8:13:12 AM PDT
by
JohnGalt
(They're All Lying)
To: Enemy Of The State
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.
8
posted on
07/23/2003 8:13:15 AM PDT
by
Little Ray
(When in trouble, when in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout!)
To: Enemy Of The State
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
9
posted on
07/23/2003 8:13:20 AM PDT
by
boris
(The deadliest Weapon of Mass Destruction in History is a Leftist With a Word Processor)
To: Enemy Of The State
I don't know, why did Clinton bomb Sudan?
To: Mr. K
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.
11
posted on
07/23/2003 8:15:06 AM PDT
by
LOC1
To: boris
Im with you on that one!
12
posted on
07/23/2003 8:15:31 AM PDT
by
Enemy Of The State
(If we don't take action now, We settle for nothing later!)
To: Enemy Of The State
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?
13
posted on
07/23/2003 8:17:32 AM PDT
by
IncPen
To: Enemy Of The State
I thought the invasion was all about yellowcake. Not that that's fallen through, I feel very misled. /sarcasm
14
posted on
07/23/2003 8:17:53 AM PDT
by
kevao
To: Mr. K
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!!!!!
To: boris
QUAGMIRE ALERT!
16
posted on
07/23/2003 8:22:03 AM PDT
by
ASA Vet
("Those who know, don't talk. Those who talk, don't know." (I'm in the Sgt Schultz group))
To: Enemy Of The State
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.
To: Enemy Of The State
This article sounds like good reasons to me.
18
posted on
07/23/2003 8:29:50 AM PDT
by
VRWC_minion
(Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and most are right)
To: ASA Vet
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.
19
posted on
07/23/2003 8:31:01 AM PDT
by
Sacajaweau
(God Bless Our Troops!!)
To: 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?Like a diversion is needed ? Since when did corrupt officials care who was watching ?
20
posted on
07/23/2003 8:32:07 AM PDT
by
VRWC_minion
(Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and most are right)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-102 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson