WHY DID WE GO INTO IRAQ

[Maggie123]

If you do think there will be a war with Iran, what do you think the "real reason" for the war will be? There has to be some reason, right?

-

Oh It's very clear that "the powers that be" are iching for a war with Iran. ( even though Iran has not been in a war in 200 years )

My best guess would be from looking on a map... Iran is smack dab in the middle and blocking an oil pipeline to the sea.

Of course we are being told the same lies we were told about Iraq... they have NO imagination.

[Markinsa]

Oh It's very clear that "the powers that be" are iching for a war with Iran. ( even though Iran has not been in a war in 200 years )

My best guess would be from looking on a map... Iran is smack dab in the middle and blocking an oil pipeline to the sea.

Of course we are being told the same lies we were told about Iraq... they have NO imagination.

It just doesn't make sense does it? Here the United States, posed to be the Number 1 Oil & Gas Producer in the World wants to spend all this money and lives to invade little ole Iran because they have oil...

Just like we invaded Iraq for their oil, and now we're paying them $100/bbl for it. You would think we would get this huge discount. We're a bunch of dumb@ass's...

-

[jonjon]

The reason was “National Security”. The USA is not Secure with any other country in this world dictating the price of oil, the rules of engagement, or the rate for product’s exchange.

It has become common for some of our citizens be snivel in the face of reality even if it is so unattractive.

[Rayzur]

The reason for the war in Iraq:

1. Iraq's strategic position in the Middle East.

2. OIL. If the region falls into the hands of tyrants (aka. Saddam, Ahmadinejad, Bashar al Assad,etc.) the region would become open for the enemies of the USA.

The excuse used for the incursion:

1. WMD

2. Assassination attempt.

Ding Ding!!!! You win the prize Neig, for the Readers Digest version of the Why behind the war in Iraq....

Anyone else notice 911 was the impetus event propelling us into this, and none of the reasons listed above mention Osama Bin Laden. It all got kinda garbled into one process. We get hit, Bin Laden is the assigned culprit, we declare war in Iraq Bin Laden's name is replaced with Saddam, and WMD. Presto, switcho, chango..... Oh, and then we remember to "kill" Bind Laden in 2011 so as to bring closure to a hunt left on the sidelines forgotten for years...

Of course we also had to "kill" Bin Laden to psychologically win and thereafter close that chase, so we could trot on over to Libya, where no one has heard from Quidaffi for years, but he is now a brutal tyrant akin to that of Saddam... and must be eliminated for his brutality. Kinda sews it up nice and tight.

The one thing I have not heard explained is why the US didn't intervene in the horrifically brutal tribal genocide in Africa during that same time or why we did not intervene in Tibet, which was equally brutal in wholesale slaughter of an entire people.

Wonder what it is that seems to make brutality a relative concept?

Thanks for the post Maggie! We win every time we together thoughtfully examine the assumptions that led to actions of war. And on the brink of several hot spots of current, the time couldn't be better to be conscious as to what it is we're up to around the world

[dog53]

Ding Ding!!!! You win the prize Neig, for the Readers Digest version of the Why behind the war in Iraq....

Anyone else notice 911 was the impetus event propelling us into this, and none of the reasons listed above mention Osama Bin Laden. It all got kinda garbled into one process. We get hit, Bin Laden is the assigned culprit, we declare war in Iraq Bin Laden's name is replaced with Saddam, and WMD. Presto, switcho, chango..... Oh, and then we remember to "kill" Bind Laden in 2011 so as to bring closure to a hunt left on the sidelines forgotten for years...

Of course we also had to "kill" Bin Laden to psychologically win and thereafter close that chase, so we could trot on over to Libya, where no one has heard from Quidaffi for years, but he is now a brutal tyrant akin to that of Saddam... and must be eliminated for his brutality. Kinda sews it up nice and tight.

The one thing I have not heard explained is why the US didn't intervene in the horrifically brutal tribal genocide in Africa during that same time or why we did not intervene in Tibet, which was equally brutal in wholesale slaughter of an entire people.

Wonder what it is that seems to make brutality a relative concept?

Thanks for the post Maggie! We win every time we together thoughtfully examine the assumptions that led to actions of war. And on the brink of several hot spots of current, the time couldn't be better to be conscious as to what it is we're up to around the world

Cause the only thing they grow in those countrys is maggots Razor. You know that.

[Maggie123]

The reason for the war in Iraq:

1. Iraq's strategic position in the Middle East.

2. OIL. If the region falls into the hands of tyrants (aka. Saddam, Ahmadinejad, Bashar al Assad,etc.) the region would become open for the enemies of the USA.

The excuse used for the incursion:

1. WMD

2. Assassination attempt.

Ding Ding!!!! You win the prize Neig, for the Readers Digest version of the Why behind the war in Iraq....

Anyone else notice 911 was the impetus event propelling us into this, and none of the reasons listed above mention Osama Bin Laden. It all got kinda garbled into one process. We get hit, Bin Laden is the assigned culprit, we declare war in Iraq Bin Laden's name is replaced with Saddam, and WMD. Presto, switcho, chango..... Oh, and then we remember to "kill" Bind Laden in 2011 so as to bring closure to a hunt left on the sidelines forgotten for years...

Of course we also had to "kill" Bin Laden to psychologically win and thereafter close that chase, so we could trot on over to Libya, where no one has heard from Quidaffi for years, but he is now a brutal tyrant akin to that of Saddam... and must be eliminated for his brutality. Kinda sews it up nice and tight.

The one thing I have not heard explained is why the US didn't intervene in the horrifically brutal tribal genocide in Africa during that same time or why we did not intervene in Tibet, which was equally brutal in wholesale slaughter of an entire people.

Wonder what it is that seems to make brutality a relative concept?

Thanks for the post Maggie! We win every time we together thoughtfully examine the assumptions that led to actions of war. And on the brink of several hot spots of current, the time couldn't be better to be conscious as to what it is we're up to around the world

Thank You Razor... that is what I wanted to convey, you put it very clear and concise for me. I really do appreciate that.

It was interesting that Bin Laden wasn't mentioned above. Thank You for bringing out what happened in Libya too.

Yes we do need to be aware of what is going on... otherwise we are going to loose many more of our kids and be a party to killing more innocent people.

I will not support the "war machine" anymore. We should stop this and go back to protecting our own borders and everyone would be much better off.

Nelg a big Thank You to you also... well put.

[skitealwedrop]

I think that **** Chaney was instrumental with the invasion of Iraq. Prior to taking his post as VP he was required to dump his Halliburton stock. I would imagine that he transferred the assets in some fashion to his family. Halliburton was hired to support our troops in Iraq and provide the backbone such as meals, laundry, clean drinking water and a voluminous number of other necessities that our fine troops required. Halliburton made a ton money during the war. In fact, I believe that the US taxpayers were overbilled for the work that Halliburton performed.

Sadam is history, that's a good thing. In turn I think that the war was about money. It's unfortunate that the American taxpayers are left with the expense.

[flatdawg]

In turn I think that the war was about money. It's unfortunate that the American taxpayers are left with the expense.

Take a look at the countries we have threatened and invaded over the last 10-12 years. Most, if not all, didn't have a Rothschild controlled central bank. They do now.

[skitealwedrop]

Take a look at the countries we have threatened and invaded over the last 10-12 years. Most, if not all, didn't have a Rothschild controlled central bank. They do now.

Which countries are you referring to, Flat? Be specific.

[Maggie123]

Ski I am just guessing here but I would say... Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, next Iran... I'm sure Flatdawg is more informed about which countries than I am.

I do know what happened in Libya though and it didn't just come from this video... I know we funded the terrorist that took him out.

Same as we are doing in Syria...

Libya & Gaddafi - The Truth you are not supposed to know</IMG>

Play

video

What the West has done through NATO is beyond tragic, and all the people who have bought the latest round of lies and manipulation will look to Libya as they now look to Iraq, and they will see…00:09:23

Added on 8/29/11 157,661 views

(this sums it up in just 10 minutes, it's well worth the time)

Edited January 7, 2013 by Maggie123

[jon29]

To stop the Draconians from siphoning off all the oil through the stargate to make plastic toys for their offspring. Go RV!!

[flatdawg]

Which countries are you referring to, Flat? Be specific.

Mags got most of them, but add North Korea, Sudan, and Somalia.

[kliklok00]

The reason we went to war?....Mankind loves to fight.

I cannot back this up, but I would bet a dollar to a doughnut that there has not been one full year on earth in the past _______ (pick a number) years that was "war free." The people on this planet have been in a perpetual war as far back as recorded history takes us...war defines us as a species to a certain degree. Sad but true.

So again, why did we go to war in Iraq? Because war is what we do...

[easyrider]

The reason we went to war?....Mankind loves to fight.

I cannot back this up, but I would bet a dollar to a doughnut that there has not been one full year on earth in the past _______ (pick a number) years that was "war free." The people on this planet have been in a perpetual war as far back as recorded history takes us...war defines us as a species to a certain degree. Sad but true.

So again, why did we go to war in Iraq? Because war is what we do...

lol there are always motives. Alot of that comes down to financial and power to control I believe America is becoming the New Roman empire History always finds a way to repeat itself look up the word of God in the bible and youll see the picture clearly.

Edited January 7, 2013 by easyrider

[hame55]

It just doesn't make sense does it? Here the United States, posed to be the Number 1 Oil & Gas Producer in the World wants to spend all this money and lives to invade little ole Iran because they have oil...

Just like we invaded Iraq for their oil, and now we're paying them $100/bbl for it. You would think we would get this huge discount. We're a bunch of dumb@ass's...

-

Oh,boy. Too much to teach here in just one post.

Let's use irony instead. Many of you righties hate the government. Wouldn't trust them to clean your toilet.

Then you think they invaded Iraq for our freeeeeedom.

That is truly amazing. They invaded a tiny country the size of California, with no connection to 911, on the other side of the earth, so we could have our freedom to eat apple pie here on our side of the earth.

Just the fact that so many people believe this trash is testimony to the power of television.

I once sailed to the home of the inventor of the cathode ray tube (TV) Mr Zworkin on Key Biscayne, FL. . I asked him what he thought of TV. He said he liked the "off" button.

I totally agree.

[dontlop]

H.J.Res.114

One Hundred Seventh Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,

the twenty-third day of January, two thousand and two

Joint Resolution

To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.

Whereas in 1990 in response to Iraq's war of aggression against and illegal occupation of Kuwait, the United States forged a coalition of nations to liberate Kuwait and its people in order to defend the national security of the United States and enforce United Nations Security Council resolutions relating to Iraq;

Whereas after the liberation of Kuwait in 1991, Iraq entered into a United Nations sponsored cease-fire agreement pursuant to which Iraq unequivocally agreed, among other things, to eliminate its nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons programs and the means to deliver and develop them, and to end its support for international terrorism;

Whereas the efforts of international weapons inspectors, United States intelligence agencies, and Iraqi defectors led to the discovery that Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical weapons and a large scale biological weapons program, and that Iraq had an advanced nuclear weapons development program that was much closer to producing a nuclear weapon than intelligence reporting had previously indicated;

Whereas Iraq, in direct and flagrant violation of the cease-fire, attempted to thwart the efforts of weapons inspectors to identify and destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction stockpiles and development capabilities, which finally resulted in the withdrawal of inspectors from Iraq on October 31, 1998;

Whereas in Public Law 105-235 (August 14, 1998), Congress concluded that Iraq's continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threatened vital United States interests and international peace and security, declared Iraq to be in `material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations' and urged the President `to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations';

Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations;

Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolution of the United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people;

Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces engaged in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council;

Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;

Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of United States citizens;

Whereas the attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001, underscored the gravity of the threat posed by the acquisition of weapons of mass destruction by international terrorist organizations;

Whereas Iraq's demonstrated capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction, the risk that the current Iraqi regime will either employ those weapons to launch a surprise attack against the United States or its Armed Forces or provide them to international terrorists who would do so, and the extreme magnitude of harm that would result to the United States and its citizens from such an attack, combine to justify action by the United States to defend itself;

Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) authorizes the use of all necessary means to enforce United Nations Security Council Resolution 660 (1990) and subsequent relevant resolutions and to compel Iraq to cease certain activities that threaten international peace and security, including the development of weapons of mass destruction and refusal or obstruction of United Nations weapons inspections in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 (1991), repression of its civilian population in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688 (1991), and threatening its neighbors or United Nations operations in Iraq in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 949 (1994);

Whereas in the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1), Congress has authorized the President `to use United States Armed Forces pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) in order to achieve implementation of Security Council Resolution 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, and 677';

Whereas in December 1991, Congress expressed its sense that it `supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 as being consistent with the Authorization of Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1),' that Iraq's repression of its civilian population violates United Nations Security Council Resolution 688 and `constitutes a continuing threat to the peace, security, and stability of the Persian Gulf region,' and that Congress, `supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688';

Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338) expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime;

Whereas on September 12, 2002, President Bush committed the United States to `work with the United Nations Security Council to meet our common challenge' posed by Iraq and to `work for the necessary resolutions,' while also making clear that `the Security Council resolutions will be enforced, and the just demands of peace and security will be met, or action will be unavoidable';

Whereas the United States is determined to prosecute the war on terrorism and Iraq's ongoing support for international terrorist groups combined with its development of weapons of mass destruction in direct violation of its obligations under the 1991 cease-fire and other United Nations Security Council resolutions make clear that it is in the national security interests of the United States and in furtherance of the war on terrorism that all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions be enforced, including through the use of force if necessary;

Whereas Congress has taken steps to pursue vigorously the war on terrorism through the provision of authorities and funding requested by the President to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;

Whereas the President and Congress are determined to continue to take all appropriate actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such persons or organizations;

Whereas the President has authority under the Constitution to take action in order to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States, as Congress recognized in the joint resolution on Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40); and

Whereas it is in the national security interests of the United States to restore international peace and security to the Persian Gulf region: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This joint resolution may be cited as the `Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002'.

SEC. 2. support FOR UNITED STATES DIPLOMATIC EFFORTS.

The Congress of the United States supports the efforts by the President to--

(1) strictly enforce through the United Nations Security Council all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq and encourages him in those efforts; and

(2) obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

i know this is too much for some to read ..but if ya takke your time .. you wont be stupid in another 12 years .... the president did not send this to congress .. this is what congress sent to him ... all the countrys security councils .. all the intelligence from clintons administration . the cia .. all of it was concidered.. this is congress resolution to use force to remove saddam

Edited January 7, 2013 by dontlop

[dontlop]

.

. my favorite part >>> Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;

remember this is what congress sent to the president .... 437 congressmen and 99 senators ..joint resolution .. bush gave them his intelligence reports .. congress job is to authenicate them .. add their own intelligence sources .. come up with a resolution .. and this is it .. there were no others .. only one ... joint resolution 114 .. most people couldnt find the time to read it ..it takes 20 minutes .. they dont have that much time ..they would rather spend years ,, reading the lies .. and passing them around .. then 12 years later .. ask what happened .. because they have no cclue .. so it must of all been lies ,, because they have no clue .. ..

[Rayzur]