usa claimed that they r invading Iraq to disarm it from the WMD they have and they said that they r SURE that Iraq have these WMD and r denegerous to the whole world!!!, then after the invasion usa never found any WMD in Iraq which was the main  reason for the invasion!!!\nNow,after the usa was found (LIYER) ,and caused so many inocent Iraqi ppl to die ,shouldnt the UN punish the usa for its invasion to another country ,and cheating the international community and causing all these deathes and destroying another country? \nisnt that fair?
131253
yes they should ..but do you know how?? they are punishing them self's !! the pillions that they spend over war..the thousands of soldiers died their.. the hate that they gained all over the world !! they are doing pretty mush well in punishing them self's !!
366713
I'm not sure what your point is - they never did find evidence of WMD's in Iraq, and there was no legitimate connection between Al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's government.  (I'm with you on the 9/11 bit.)  What do you want the extreme-liberals to learn - to deny reality?
656965
The issue is, as it has been all along, Iraq posed no threat to the U.S.  Most countries (including the U.S.) have WMD's but should we go around invading and destroying them all just because they have them?  Doesn't that make us as bad as they are?  What about North Korea?  They have the capability to really do some damage if they so desire.  Bush is an embarassment to the U.S. and the world.  Let's just hope we can ALL survive the remainder of his presidency and get our troops home.
567406
I would hate to even think about it. But revenge is the answer. Isn't that the first reason Afghanistan, then Iraq were invaded to revenge 9/11. It's human nature, only there has been no concrete proof approved by the UN to prove they were responsible - only media coverage that had the effect of mass brain washing and that has confessed that Iraq had nothing to with 9/11 or had WMD.\n\nIraqi and other people are being punished and labeled as terrorists simply because they are defending their country; a country that was invaded for no reason, lately being bringing them democracy! Democracy on the other hand would not accept that people are jailed, sent off to be tortured for years without a trial then maybe finally released without being convicted of anything.\n\nThese people (Iraqis etc.) have nothing to defend themselves with against heavy military weapons, napalm bombs bombarding on them and their loved ones, destroying their homes and the infrastructure of their country and yet they fight back, they are terrorists!\n\nOther nations, can shoot children and women on the beach because they have a "right to defend themselves" while other nations are being fought on their own soil by invaders and they do not have this same right. I cannot understand the discrimination and double standards applied.
410224
Well...we were telling the truth.\n\nI know, Its hard for you to accept it and your whole ideology is crumbling down before you but the fact is...By invading Iraq we STOPPED saddam from making Nukes.\n\nthere it is in black and white in the old gray lady herself. \n\nNow why dont you come on over to the winning side. Youve been spoon fed lies.
557073
This question has been answered numerous times. There were many reasons why the coalition of over 30 nations invaded Iraq.\n\nThere were WMD, so you are either a fool or a liar.\n\nAs for the trial, this is just one of the many instances of Saddam's brutality. We have found 10's of 1000's of bodies in mass graves already.\n\nAll this info is on the web.
42715
I do believe that the ex-iraqi regime wasn't good at all , it was totally vicious and a real evil , but , please , is it a US leader who meant to correct that ? no and million no , i prefer saddam husain than what america did over there , it was a big lie , they wanted oil for israel,  why should they do that and lose millions of millions ? because simply US is actually ruled and govern by israel , israeli rich people are all in US and they have the US economy in their hands , bush couldn't refuse that ,  yes all those who talked about mass distruction weapons were liers and  america won't do the same with iran because it would be a change point in the history when iran kick US ass-es , NOW  FOR ALL THOSE STILL BELIEVE US ADMINISTRATION : PLEASE , DO U FEEL BETTER WHEN YOUR FAMILIES MEMBERS ARE DYING IN IRAQ IN A WAR THEY WEREN'T SUPPOSE TO HANDLE , ARE YOU HAPPY WHILE IRAQI INNOCENT CHILDREN AND WOMEN AND OLD MEN BEING KILLED WITHOUT ANY MERCY FOR NO CLEAR REASONS ? COME ON I DON'T WANT THAT FREEDOM WHICH DAMAGING A COUNTRY AND MAKE IT EVEN WORSE THAN WHAT I HAS BEEN , PLEASE , AND HONESTLY  , LET'S CONFESS , YOUR DMINISTRATION LIED A BIG LIE , AND YOUR PEOPLE , OUR PEOPLE ( MUSLIMS) , ARE THE REAL VICTIMS , WE DON'T HATE YOU , YOU DON'T HATE US , YOUR ADMIMINSTRATION ARE DOING THINGS LIKE THAT .... THINK AGAIN ,,, AND BE CAREFUL IT'S WON'T BE LIKE THIS NEXT TIME ..\n\n\nTHANKS FOR THE ASKER
206077
Why we are champions of the free world for it. We must of rid the country of weapons of mass destruction because we didn't find any we overthrew a government, that should be our roll in life. Overthrowing other governments while getting 2500 of ours killed and nobody knows how many Iraqi's. Old men, woman and children was the real problem over there that is why we killed them, and best of all we have ignited a civil war. It just don't get any better then that, unless we can kill a few more baby's in a bombing.
2857
The united states does things that are in its own best interest, but not necessarily if its right or wrong. \n Iraq had no weapons, but we attacked anyway because it is to our advantage politically and economically. \nIt will free up more oil and give us more world power. It is selfish but that is how it is.
465781
Yes it was just. Saddam Hussein illegally invaded another country with the intent of stealing their oil and land.\nThe world united against him for this unjust act he committed.\n\n    This is in no way relevant to todays war.
532322
John, You ask serious questions and you deserve serious answers -- even though they may not be what you want to hear.\n\nThe tribunal that convicted Saddam was not set up by the Americans, it was set up by the Iraqis themselves under provision of extant Iraqi law.\n\nTo group the rest of your questions together: \nIt's very important that Saddam by tried by his countrymen, and not by the World Court, or any other international tribunal. To try him there would have been an admission that the Iraqis lacked the ability to administer justice in their own land.\n\nWhether you or I agree with the whole Iraqi invasion is irrelevant. The fact is, now, it is imperative to do whatever it takes to send the message that the Iraqi government is in charge of its own destiny. How else can the fledgeling government claim any credibility at all if it fails to take on the responsibility of prosecuting this heinous criminal? \n\nAs to the release date of the sentence -- that date was established months ago when the verdict was announced. I doubt there was any connection between the announcement and the election in America. The new government in Iraq has been eager in recent months to demonstrate as much distance between their actions and the desires of the Americans as possible (consider the recent order by the government for the Americans to pull down blockades in Sadr City) I just don't believe they would be willing to be used like this.\n\nAnd finally, it really is worth noting -- you're correct, Saddam may have been tried by (what you call) "politcal/ethnic opponents;" but he was convicted on the basis of overwhelming amounts of unimpeachable evidence as to his active complicity in genocide. We owe it to ourselves to remember that.\n\nCheers, mate.
667362
I can't believe some of the responses you're getting, dude! \n\nThere are some replies above this one that think attacking Iraq was necessary. First - I am all in favor of the post-9/11 response to Afghanistan, specifically, the Taliban that helped Osama. Unfortunately, Osama was originally trained by the CIA to cause terror vs. the USSR back in the day, but we'll forget that for now.\n\nDoesn't anyone recall when Bush paraded his whole team out and they were certain they knew where the WMDs were, etc. etc.? Did Saddam need to be stopped? Well, yeh, but he (and the whole country) was contained and crippled. There were humanitarian organizations calling for blockades to be lifted, it was crushing the country.\n\nI honestly don't know why people aren't more outraged about it. I think racism and crusade nostalgia play into it. I think they just don't care. It sets an example in a somewhat positive way, that is, it shows other nations that the USA is irrational, therefore, stay away. Unfortunately, I think acting firmly rational and strong can have the same effect. \n\nOh, yeah. I guess people are ok with attacking Iraq because it helped bring down oil prices. \n\nWhoops.
665779
it's not wise at all....to martin s on top, i really appreciate what u guys did in iraq to help the pple. however, why did the US invade iraq in the first place? on ground that they are havin WMD, isn't it? However, in my own understanding (correct me if im worng), the UN didn't agree to use military force, the US went in themselves..and for the saddam issues...whatever or however tyrant he maybe, it's still his country's problems...why did the US wanted to interfere??? u said Iraq has lotsa terrorist training camps all around in iraq, there're so many training camps around in the world, indonesia, afganistan adn so much more in the middle east, can the US really eradicate all?? I think the reasons behind it is still the availabilty of iraq's oil..why, weapons of mass destruction, well, North korea and iran had admitted to owning them, but the US didn't attack them...and iraq, US claims there're WMD, where the hell are the evidence??
603736
How can I say this so the some of the people answering this question will understand. IRAQ WAS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOT THE 9/11 ATTACKS AND NEITHER WAS AFGHANISTAN.\n\nIs that clear enough? Now given that they weren't responsible, whay are they being invaded? What could they possibly have that the US wnats? Oh my gosh! shock! horror! it's oil. Of course the US is stealing Iraqi resources.
198964
Yes there have been numerous documents and tapes released by the government implementing Saddam's regime talking about where to take the WMD's and how to lie to the UN.  I don't know where to get ahold of those documents though, I heard it on Limbaugh's radio show, try calling him he would undoubtedly know.  When I was there we found numerous empty carriers for large warheads and plenty of chemical and biological weapons.  But WMD's are not the only reason for Iraq, him supporting and paying terrorists is just like having WMD's.  There are many anti-American HUGE paintings on buildings displaying the bombing of America and many had mushroom clouds.  I believe since we told Saddam we was coming he got them out.  The terrorist network over there is crazy.  If you have any other questions email me
538294
Politically, it obviously wasn't a very good move, but other than that?  People seem to have forgotten the satellite images-they were hauling something...could this have been the WMD that was gone before the war was started?  Aside from that, though, we went in by using the UN resolutions as justification.  These **NUMEROUS** resolutions did not state that we could attack if Iraq has WMD, they put the burden of proof on Saddam-he had to prove that he didn't have WMD; that he had destroyed the KNOWN WMD from the 1st Gulf War.  He couldn't account for the WMD, therefore, we went in to uphold our side of the resolutions.
407516
there are several ways to look at this.firstly the weapons of mass destruction were never found but the iraqs were living under a dictator.sometimes you have to look at the wider angle and decide the real motives behind it was it oil.i dont know but what i do know is this tinderbox is well and truly kindled and people are getting killed trying to stabalise the situation.i feel sorry for all the soldiers and innocent people caught up and being killed  in a confused and volatile country .in my opinion it is a no win situatin for both sides .