Why did George W. Bush go into Iraq?... why is he fighting terrorsits?
917578
well umm... how idiotic can you get....\n\nafter the disaster of 9/11 we  most go into Iraq to stop from the same incident happening again!\n\n( I hope you now what 9/11 is)\n\nIts people like you who criticize Bush for his negative actions, but its his actions that are (positive) that are making us safe from their negative reproduction world plan. Its also keeping us safe from a terrorist attack.\n\nWithout fighting terrorists we wou,ld have a 10 times bigger problem geopolitically today and mostly in the future... I hope you know that too\n\nTry to RESEARCH before you ask\n\nand... I opligize for any rudeness.\n\nThankyou\n\n~LG23~
912228
Bush needed to appear to be proactive and doing something to avenge the 3000 who died on 9/11. He could have declared war on walmart, called it a righeous holy war, and the ignorant nabobs would have gotten behind THAT too.\n\nIt was face-saving P.R., nothing more. There's no dumber person than the one who says we are in Iraq to contain terrorism, for freedom or over 9/11. Those who say these things don't have a dreaming clue of what the reality of the situation is.\n\nThe Iraqi people rightly want an end to the rampant random slaughter of hundreds of thousands of their fellow countrymen that has ensued in the chaos after the American invasion destroyed social order and infrastructure, without replacing it with anything.
801558
Please ignore these other nitwits - it's late and their mommies are out partying and so are not home to put them to bed.\n\nThe answer to your question is that Saddam sent a hit team to kill George H. W. Bush (the current President's father and the 41st President of the United States) in Kuwait when Bush was there to receive thanks from the Kuwaiti government and people for freeing them from the yoke of the Iraqi dictator.\n\nBill Clinton was President at the time of the attempted assassination and, being the Weak Sister that he is, he just sent a few cruise missles into Iraq and called it a day.  What he should have done was to go back to Iraq and kill Saddam at that time - but, as I say, he's a very weak man (he's not REALLY a man, he just has a man's body) and so he did almost nothing.
822121
Someone ask the dictator to explain himself?  Of course not, they would have been ushered from the White House as quickly as possible.  It's very clear, from all reports, that Bush doesn't listen to anyone who doesn't kiss his butt and just accept everything he has to say.  Colin Powell ring any bells?  I fully agree with what this question seems to suggest.  Bush 41 should have finished Hussein when he had the chance, and Bush 43 should have set aside his obsession with Iraq and finished the job in Afghanistan.  Now, thanks to him, the terrorists are now in Iraq in droves.  Self-fulfilling prophecy?  I suppose so, he claimed connection between Hussein and 9/11 before the evidence forced him to admit there was no connection.  Now he can talk about the terrorists being in Iraq all he pleases, we blew the country wide open and gave them very safe passage inside.  Good job again Bush.
923445
President Bush wanted to invade Iraq since before he became President. When he decided to run he made it clear to his staff that one of his main objectives as President would be to invade Iraq and oust Saddam Hussein. When we were attacked on September 11th President Bush saw his opportunity to accomplish what he had been dreaming about. He used the fear the American people had of another Terrorist Attack and said and found anyone who would say Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction, no matter how shaky or non-existent their evidence was. He than told the American people over and over again that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction and was working with Al Qaeda. Well everyone in America was so terrified of the prospect of Saddam Hussein giving a WMD to Terrorists that have already attacked us once that most supported the invasion. President Bush new he needed alot of troops to invade Iraq, so he sent the bare minimum to Afghanistan relying on international support to fight that war and sent 150,000 troops to Iraq. If you send 150,000 troops to one war and 2,000 to another, which do you think is going to work faster? President Bush clearly doesn't care about our National Security or punishing those that are responsible for killing 3,000 Americans. He is only concerned with getting revenge on Saddam Hussein and winning elections.
90649
He believes that as president he is exempt from laws and ethics.  He doesn't like Iraq and he likes war, so he decided to invade.\n\n\n\n>>>It probably costs far less in the long run to stop terrorist \n>>>extremists in their tracks now\n\nIf there were any evidence that Iraq had any ties to the 9/11 terrorists, I'd agree with you.  As the terrorists were primarily Saudi, I fail to see the logic.  All our invasion of Iraq is doing by way of terrorism is fueling the very resentment that lead to the attacks in the first place.
124793
George Bush is crazy with power.  Americans that actually do research and ask questions about this administration come to understand that it is evil and corrupt.  Why wouldn't he do business with his buddies?  After all, he did LET them attack us on 9-11.
878329
I am on the side to bring everyone home from Iraq. George Bush has really screwed over the American public with his little power struggle. I want him sent to Iraq to fight his own war He lied to us to get us over there. There are no weapons of mass destruction and he is more guilty of killing people now than Sadam is. Perhaps George Bush should be put on trial now for war crimes to Americans for his lie and Iraq people for all the people that lost their lives just trying to live.
1061193
Because you question the Bush doctorine, that makes you a terrorist.\n\nprepare to be invaded.
108936
Oh gosh, don't even get me started. I'll try and make this as brief as possible\n\nBush's reasons for invading Iraq:\n1. To find weapons of mass destruction\n2. Because of Irag's alleged link with the 9/11 terrorists\n\nDid we find WMDs: Nope\nDid we find any proof or even evidence of a link between the 9/11 hijackers and Iraq: Nope\n\nWhile, i agree that saddam hussein (excuse my spelling) is a bad man, he kept stability in his country and posed no direct threat to us. It is not our responsibility, nor should it be, to decide who is good and who is "bad" and then take steps to remove them when we see fit. \nHad Iraq actually posed a threat to our national security I may feel differently, but Iraq did not pose such a threat.\n\nUnfortunately, our intelligence organizations are partially to blame, however, there are also individuals in the political realm whom are responsible.\n\nWhy did we not listen to the U.N. or Hans Blix? Are we too arrogant as a country to listen to what the international community has to say, especially the U.N., and organization we helped to create?\n\nOh my, i could go on and on and on and on, but i don't feel like typing that much.
927117
Because of all the WMDs that Saddam had.\nNo, wait a minute, because we wanted to spread democracy.\nOn second thought, it was to pursue the War of Terrorism.\nWait, it was because we went in and we have to stay the course.\nHang on, gimme a sec... \n\nI don't really know.
709522
He should go to Iraq and serve for just one day or just one hour in a hot zone and maybe he would realize what kind of insanity he and Bush have caused.  Maybe he could search for WMDs and Osama while he is there.  That is assuming that he can remember that was the original reason we are over there.
211206
The only logical explanation I can find is as follows:\n\nThe first assumption is that we had to go into Iraq initially to remove Saddam Hussein. The real reason may never be known (daddy, oil, the Baghdad battery, who knows).\n\nThis was about Americans being free from the threat of Saddam somehow managing to cobble together a missile that could reach the West Coast. Unlikely, I know, but you could imagine it at a stretch. Hell, he had a lot of aluminum tubes, maybe it would have been a very long blow tube dart.\n\nHe could also have withheld OIL from us, which would have removed the freedom to drive enormous vehicles to the store to buy groceries, unless you wanted to take out a mortgage for 10 miles of gas.\n\nOnce we were in there things changed. Having removed Saddam, it soon became clear that we'd messed things up. All the excuses for the war came tumbling down, so we needed some new ones. Luckily, the insurgency provided that. There were now terrorists in Iraq.\n\nThis was something the Iraqis hadn't known for years. Theirs was a very well controlled environment. There was no crime, and everyone was happy. Very much in the same way, as there is no crime in an area controlled by the mob, unless it is authorized. It also made for the next excuse - Iraq was now a (and still is) a breeding ground for terrorists.\n\nThese new terrorists do directly affect our freedom, so its important the soldiers are there to show that even the most powerful military force on the planet can do nothing about them. We should always be scared of terrorists - and that directly impacts our freedom.\n\nEven more insidious (and I thought of this before 24) is the through that terrorism may remove our freedoms altogether.\n\nThe plot is as follows. Terrorists created in Iraq infiltrate the US and manage a semi-devastating attack. The government has to impose martial law to deal with it. This is close to Nov 2008 and the election cannot take place with martial law imposed, so it is postponed. Bush remains in power as a (now) military dictator. Saddam is very jealous. In order to function better, executive power to make any decision to defend against terrorism means that the administration disbands congress since its getting in the way.\n\nIn this way, the soldiers fighting in Iraq are fighting for us. If they can defeat the terrorists, Bush may not be given the opportunity to remove all our freedoms.
903307
I'd like to see the proof that the USA planned 9/11.  Oh wait...there isn't any.  If there was it would be all over the mainstream, Bush-bashing, media.  Pelosi, Murtha, Kerry would just die to have this information and go after our President and all Republicans.  You live in a fantasy world.  And by the way, we did not go into Iraq because of 9/11.  We went into Afghanistan.  We went into Iraq because Hussein needed to be taken out of power for the good of the Iraqi people, for the good of America and the world.
303173
Their are no WMD's lol its just Bush being a paranoid retard. The only reason we are invading iraq is for revenue, mostly oil. He is just finishing his daddy's work and invading innocent people for nothing. In fact, the al quaeda is in afghanistan and osama is in afghanistan, it has nothing to do with iraq in fact afghanistan and iraq are two completely different countries...revenue i say...impeach bush...please lol
1039516
There are only two reasons why George Bush invaded Iraq, a sovereign nation that did not attack or provoke the USA: 1) Bush wanted to 'get even' with Saddam Hussein for humiliating his daddy during Desert Storm; and 2) Dick Cheney wants all the oil swimming under Iraq's sands so he and his Halliburton buddies can get richer and richer and richer.\n\nThe United States WILL NOT WITHDRAW ALL ITS TROOPS FROM IRAQ UNTIL DICK CHENEY HAS A ROCK-SOLID, IRON-CLAD DEAL IN PLACE TO ACQUIRE ALL OF IRAQ'S OIL. And that's why we're in the middle of a illegal and unconstitutional war with Iraq, which is putting this country trillions of dollars in debt, and which is ruining our reputation as a global leader. \n\nIt's all about greed, power, petty little jealousies, and OIL. The U.S. knows that China's appetite for oil is getting bigger every day. It has no intention of allowing Iraq's oil to go to China.\n\nWe tolerate other despots around the world - in fact, there are several dictatorship regimes which we actually prop up with financial aid and let the genocide continue. Why? Because those countries have no OIL. \n\nGeorge Bush, Dick Cheney, and Don Rumsfeld are the most evil, corrupt, incompetent megolomaniacs ever to occupy the Oval Office. This current U.S. Congress is the most evil, corrupt, incompetent body ever to occupy the Capitol Building. All of them deserve to be impeached or tried for high treason. If convicted, they all must face a public firing squad.\n\nBush is nothing more than a spoiled rich kid who never had to assume responsibility for any actions he's ever taken in life. He was kept out of harm's way while pretending to serve in a military guard unit. His daddy covered up countless DWIs and other legal jams his drug-using, alcohol-abusing son go into; and Bush has never had a job where he's really had to do any physical labor. His life has been one of privilege and power; he has always been isolated from the poor, sick, disabled, or disadvantaged. That's why is has such disdain for most of America's "common" people. \n\nHis claims of being a "born-again" Christian are bogus. Have you ever seen him walking out of a church on Sunday morning with his family?\n\nSurely Satan has reserved a special oil-saturated  corner of Hell for Bush and all his cronies, where they can spend their eternal damnation blaming each other for the mess they made of this country in eight short years. \n\nNext on the Bush agenda: Iran (it, too, has gobs of OIL). We'll find some flimsy excuse why we need to invade Iran (maybe we'll be searching for weapons of mass destruction again). \n\nAnd, if 'war' escalates right prior to the next national election, George Bush will impose martial law, postponing the elections until peace has been restored. That will make him America's first King George. The avarice, arrogance, and hypocrisy of this Republican-led band of modern day Robin Hoods (who rob the poor and give it all to their rich friends) is unspeakable. \n\nSadly, even if we could throw them all out of office, we'd only be replacing them with another band of crooked Democractic politicians. The only solution is another American Revolution.\n\nCheck out the newest blog: BUSHWACKER!\nwww.blogger.com\nhttp://al-aback.blogspot.com\n\nThomas Jefferson once said: "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." That time is way overdue. \n\nBut, if our government can keep us distracted with maxxed-out credit cards, Britney Spears' new baby, and buying all kinds of junk we don't need at WalMart for "low prices - everyday" it can continue to play its great American shell game and keep up the shameful scam it has perpetrated on this country for more than five decades now.
917387
I think it's good to help people no matter where they are, but it's true that a lot more focus needs to be done here.  How can Bush say he is concerned with the welfare and safety of the Iraqi people when he can leave his own people stranded in New orleans for all of those horrible days? He was on vacation when he knew a huge storm was coming. Did he send troops there to protect his own people? I see your point.