US - Iraq War

Jazzy

Forum Admin
Joined
Jun 27, 2016
Messages
55,633
Location
Vermont
us-iraq-war.jpg
On March 20, 2003, a US-led coalition of 49 countries invaded Iraq and overthrew the government within three weeks. The US declared an official end to the war on Dec. 15, 2011, although some military personnel and security contractors remain in Iraq as members of the US diplomatic mission. Over 4,000 US soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died in the war.

Proponents argue that liberating the people of Iraq from Saddam Hussein’s human rights abuses, spreading democracy in the region, enforcing UN regulations, finding suspected weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), and making the US safer from terrorism in a post-9/11 world, all justified the war.

Opponents argue that Iraq had no WMDs or connection to 9/11, and that the Bush administration wanted Iraqi oil and any excuse to remove Hussein. They say the attack violated international law, killed countless civilians, wasted billions of dollars, and made the US more vulnerable to terrorism.

Debate Question: Should the US Have Attacked Iraq? (Why/Why Not)
 

Webster

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
14,051
Location
North Carolina
Debate Question: Should the US Have Attacked Iraq? (Why/Why Not)
No; Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, there were no WMD's (doesn't mean there wasn't evidence of a past WMD program but there were no WMDs' present) and Saddam Hussein didn't pose a threat to the United States....but as a result, two things happened: (1) we got what eventually became ISIS (formerly AQI - Al Qaeda in Iraq and before that, Ansar-al Islam) and (2) we effectively gave Iran a nice, friendly (to them) neighbor.
 

Kaunisto

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
4,888
Location
Finland
You really don't want to get me started on this, so I'll try to just express my opinion shortly:
Iraq War was the stupidest, most blatantly illegal and downright wrong thing United States has done in my lifetime. The day it started was the most shocking and disillusioning moment of my life.
 

TRUE LIBERTY

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
5,847
Location
Florida
Yes we should have went in. The problem was not that we went in it was how we fought the war. We did not fight it to bring the enemy to there knees. How we managed the everything after the war was wrong. And then finally leaving the region before we had the area stabilized was wrong.

As the New York Times reported in there huge article last year we were buying wmd weapons from arms dealers inside of Iraq just before the start of the war. We did find WMD weapons after the war and we were finding them years after the war.

Saddam was violating numerous terms of his surrender for years like constantly shooting at our jets enforcing the no fly zones.

Saddam did use his WMD weapons on people right after the first war and when he said he would use them again and never proved he got rid of what he had we had to take him at his word.

Saddam had 550 metric tons we recovered of Uranium. If that right there all by itself is not a huge danger for a WMD weapon I do not know what is.

Numerous terrorist training camps were being funded by Saddam in Iraq for terrorists all over the middle east and Africa.

Saddam was paying the families for anyone that killed themselves while taking out Americans or Israelis.

And that about does it for now.
 

Webster

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
14,051
Location
North Carolina
Yes we should have went in. The problem was not that we went in it was how we fought the war. We did not fight it to bring the enemy to there knees. How we managed the everything after the war was wrong. And then finally leaving the region before we had the area stabilized was wrong.

As the New York Times reported in there huge article last year we were buying wmd weapons from arms dealers inside of Iraq just before the start of the war. We did find WMD weapons after the war and we were finding them years after the war.

Saddam was violating numerous terms of his surrender for years like constantly shooting at our jets enforcing the no fly zones.

Saddam did use his WMD weapons on people right after the first war and when he said he would use them again and never proved he got rid of what he had we had to take him at his word.

Saddam had 550 metric tons we recovered of Uranium. If that right there all by itself is not a huge danger for a WMD weapon I do not know what is.

Numerous terrorist training camps were being funded by Saddam in Iraq for terrorists all over the middle east and Africa.

Saddam was paying the families for anyone that killed themselves while taking out Americans or Israelis.

And that about does it for now.
Doesn't matter; we had the sonuvabitch contained; we did not have to go in there. But hey, anything to keep warmongers like yourself happy, huh?
 

TRUE LIBERTY

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
5,847
Location
Florida
Doesn't matter; we had the sonuvabitch contained; we did not have to go in there. But hey, anything to keep warmongers like yourself happy, huh?
How do you contain someone who was training terrorists all over Iraq? How to do you contain someone who did have WMDS and 500 tons of uranium and was itching to find a way to eventually use it? Warmonger no? Me I would love to pull up stakes of every military base on this planet and send the troops home and tell Europe we have defended you since WW2 now it is all on you. GOOD LUCK!
 

Webster

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
14,051
Location
North Carolina
Me I would love to pull up stakes of every military base on this planet and send the troops home and tell Europe we have defended you since WW2 now it is all on you.
And 70 years of post-WW2 history would stomp you into the damn ground like so must dust. *mutters obscenities for several minutes* :mad::mad:
 

TRUE LIBERTY

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
5,847
Location
Florida
And 70 years of post-WW2 history would stomp you into the damn ground like so must dust. *mutters obscenities for several minutes* :mad::mad:
Not really, we have just made Europe dependent on our military when they should have been building up there own over those years.
 

Webster

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
14,051
Location
North Carolina
Not really, we have just made Europe dependent on our military when they should have been building up there own over those years.
tumblr_nxjvhp2l4G1rfd7lko1_500.png
...and that was a bad thing? Would you've preferred the Soviets back in 1945 to just run over Western Europe after we left?
 

Worldwide

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
2,259
Location
Ireland
After the collapse of the Soviet Union we just got out of Europe and around the world for that matter and that would have forced Europe to invest more in there own military instead of depending on us.
With respect, you have a really American centric view of the world .. You don't think that the UK, France and other European counties have armies and weapons?
The US only goes where it is in the interest of the US to be. The US are not the protectors of Europe, but if course you won't even take that into consideration because in your world the USA is the saviour of the world.
 

TRUE LIBERTY

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
5,847
Location
Florida
With respect, you have a really American centric view of the world .. You don't think that the UK, France and other European counties have armies and weapons?
The US only goes where it is in the interest of the US to be. The US are not the protectors of Europe, but if course you won't even take that into consideration because in your world the USA is the saviour of the world.
There is a website that shows the worlds military equipment. Maybe I will find later. Anyways even in todays world you take a look at how pathetic it looks. You would have thought after WW2 they might have learned there lesson and built up. But they have depended on us all these decades and I say enough is enough.

It is time for us to increase our carriers and have less land bases.
 
R

Rinko

There is a website that shows the worlds military equipment. Maybe I will find later. Anyways even in todays world you take a look at how pathetic it looks. You would have thought after WW2 they might have learned there lesson and built up. But they have depended on us all these decades and I say enough is enough.

It is time for us to increase our carriers and have less land bases.
Actually, if we work merely by available manpower, the European Union eclipses the US army by around 20,000.
 

Worldwide

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
2,259
Location
Ireland
Actually, if we work merely by available manpower, the European Union eclipses the US army by around 20,000.
And that doesn't even include Turkey, who although is not a member of Europe is a member of NATO and has the second largest army in all of NATO.
 

TRUE LIBERTY

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
5,847
Location
Florida
Actually, if we work merely by available manpower, the European Union eclipses the US army by around 20,000.
I can't find the site right now but that is to simplistic and not quite accurate if you include the states military reserves. This site breaks down every tank. Every cargo plane. Every military ship. Every Cargo Ship. Every military jet and helicopter. Every nuke to every canon. Well you get the point I am making. Will keep looking it is quite staggering the difference between us and the total of what Europe has.
 
Top Bottom