promotion image of download ymail app
Promoted

Would the Bush administration have bothered going to war in Iraq if it learned that Saddam Hussein had ceased WMD production in the 1990s?

a. Yes. Bush was aware of the possibility that Saddam Hussein's overthrow would allow Iraqi Shiite extremists to turn Iraq into an anti-American theocracy in the style of Iran, while Sunni extremists would have the liberty to plan a Taliban-like state with the ideological trappings of the Taliban and al-Qaeda.

b. No. Bush knew that his predecessor expressed his commitment to a free and democratic Iraq by signing the 1998 Iraq Liberation Act, so he would have alienated Iraqi Shiites and Kurds living in exile in the US who had painful memories of Saddam's atrocities against the Kurds and Shiites by simply having tea with Saddam or inviting him to a state dinner at the White House.

c. No. Given Bush's promulgation of the Freedom Agenda, the US would have been inclined to support a Shiite-led democracy in Iraq as a peaceful alternative to the anti-American, anti-Israel theocracy in Iran.

d. Yes. We now know that Saddam Hussein was willing to resume WMD production if the UN lifted sanctions against Iraq, and so Saddam would have known that Bush's tough stance against Iraq may have put him in a position where he was inclined not to make anymore mustard gas or anthrax.

9 Answers

Relevance
  • 6 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    On the eve of the invasion of Iraq, CNN aired satellite views of containers of WMD being loaded into trucks for removal from Iraq.

    It would have been great if Saddam quit producing chemical and biological weapons, but he did not.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 6 years ago

    Yep. Iraq would have been invaded even if 9/11 had never happened.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_for_the_New_A...

    http://www.reasoned.org/e_PNAC2.htm

    The members list looks like a who's who of the Bush Administration.

    The nonexistent WMDs were nothing more than a pretext to knock over Saddam's apple cart, seize Iraq's oil fields, all the while hiding behind the 9/11 hysteria that the Bushies exploited without shame.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    6 years ago

    The Iraq war was a favor for the Saudi Royal family so by any means necessarily would he start a war like claiming Saddam had WMD's regardless if he knew it was truth or not and using a terrorist attack caused by mostly Saudis to blame the Iraq government.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    6 years ago

    No.

    Even the dumbas* Democrats wanted a 2nd chance to vote on the invasion of Iraq.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Kojak
    Lv 7
    6 years ago

    FIRST You missed a few steps in your "liberal" tap dance.

    SECOND The issue was not if he was making WMDs.....which he still was BTW.....but if he had access to WMDs....which even the UN now admits he did...(want a partial list?)

    THIRD WMDs were not the only reason for the war....and it was NEVER about oil or 911.....

    FINALLY You need to do some OBJECTIVE research and some critical thinking..... you are a victim of liberal propaganda

    SUM....Lets examine your allegation....

    FIRST Awarding the contract to Haliburton....instead of an open bid....in that under an open bid the contract would .....without a doubt....been awarded to a European company.... that would mean all those jobs would have gone to Europeans not Americans.....all those taxes would have gone to European countries not America.... oversight would have been even more difficult....graft and corruption more difficult to control, detect and punish....

    SECOND....profits.....lets see.... Dick Chaney made 6 million dollars on his Haliburton stock..... shocking .... terrible .....Oh BTW Dick Chaney also gave away NINE MILLION TO CHARITY.....do you think European stock holders would have done that????

    Buy a clue....and stop following blindly the liberal mantra

    SIR STUDLEY AND M^RE..... It was NEVER about oil....we never even tried to control their oil....It was under the full control of the Iraq government / the UN....in fact we even FIRED a UN diplomat for suggesting we get war reparations by working out a "sweet" oil deal....we get no oil from Iraq....even before the war we only got 4%.... getting information about conservatism from MSNBC is sort of like asking the Pope about the quality of French whore houses.....they neither have the knowledge nor are inclined to find out.....

    America gets most of their oil from Canada / Venezuela..... I suppose now you think we are poised to invade South America....buy a clue....it was NEVER about oil....WE have more oil than Iraq

    WIZ.... President Bush said TWICE on national TV...."The war in Iraq is not about 911. There is no proof Iraq knew anything about 911. The war in Iraq is about the support of international terrorism"

    Do you do any research before you post crap?

    Saddam Hussein trained international terrorists including Al Queda. Saddam Hussein funded Al Queda according to his wife. Saddam Hussein gave shelter to international terrorists including "Carlos". Saddam Hussein gave $25,000 dollars to the families of suicide bombers who killed innocent people. There were legitimate reasons for this war.... more-so than any war since WW II..... and they had nothing to do with oil or 911

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Magik
    Lv 4
    6 years ago

    Yes , the mission was regime change because Saddam didn't have a Central Bank .

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Sum
    Lv 7
    6 years ago

    Bush needed to start two wars as gifts for his Rich friends. I imagine that Cheney and Halliburton put 1/2 a TRILLION dollars into their sleazy pockets - while "conservative" morons clapped their little hands.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    6 years ago

    Um any proof of this other than your imagination ?

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    6 years ago

    Yes, because it had nothing to do with WMDs.

    http://www.msnbc.com/maddow-why-we-did-it

    • Susan M
      Lv 7
      6 years agoReport

      "Why We Did It"? Under Obama who fled Iraq, it's so Iran can market the oil. The US has plenty of its own.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.