Was the invasion of Iraq justified? [Dai-Sifu vs myrmidones] Commentary Thread

[Thanatos]

Say your piece here regarding this topic.

[Treize]

Certainly not, it only led to a bloody civil war, 100000 civilian casualties, 400000 christians fleeing the country and a half arsed democracy bound to fail because of the pillarisation of Iraqi society.

[Dodge]

WHERE ARE TEH WMDS????????????????//////////

[Banana Jelly]

Certainly not. Many innocent civilians fell victims to the treacherous war. A disastrous civil war. The country started swirling downward. There was also no justification for war, rather Bush thought that Saddam was carrying nukes. Which was obviously false.

[Brapbrapbap]

War.

What is it good for?

[Dai-Sifu]

Exactly - the facts are Iraq was a safer place not only for the Kurds, Sunnis and Shia but also for the rest of the world - all the Iraq invasion caused was a cluster you now what, of a problem in the Middle East - Iran has more power of the people of Iraq now that Saddam and the Baath party are gone. No more balance in the region. More problems for the West.

[garudamon11]

i hope bush dies a painful death like his little gay friend ariel sharon

[Dai-Sifu]

i hope bush dies a painful death like his little gay friend ariel sharon

That's taking it too far

[Viking Prince]

If Saddam had not invaded Kuwait, there would never have been a second war with Iraq. If after the first war, Saddam had mad a clean breast of everything as he promised in the ceasefire agreement , there still would not have been a second war. He had agreed to identify and dispose of the materials in a clearly verifiable manner. He did not do this and was thus in violation of the ceasefire agreement.

The motivation for the USA was not this detail, but this was a detail that would get UN Security Council support.

So why did the USA wish to see the ceasefire voided if it was not for the WMD? It may be as simple as we were tired of the cat and mouse game. It certainly had to do with targeting radar on the overfight jets monitoring his military activities. Also, the continued threat to ground personnel was not acceptable.

In the end, the second or the renewed war was not necessary. Unfortunately, it was the fault of Saddam and not the UN or the USA.

[Banana Jelly]

But the problem is, Bush made it sound as if Saddam has nuclear weapons, to get US support for the war, in which clearly Saddam did not.

[Dodge]

That's taking it too far

It really isn't. Both of those people truly are scum.

[Lord Rahl]

I tend to think that intelligence before the war warranted belief that Iraq had significant WMD programs including nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons. This is based on UNSCOM (United Nations Special Commission) reports and inspections (mostly from 1991 to 1998). The IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency also made inspections but was not allowed to make inspections after 1998, although they were let back in 2001 but with restrictions so full inspections could not be made.

http://www.fas.org/news/un/iraq/s/990125/index.html
http://www.iaea.org/worldatom/Progra...nTeam/nwp2.htm
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/index.html

While these programs were not all producing actual viable WMDs - the nuclear program was decided by the IAEA to not be able to develop a weapon - Iraqi defectors, including Saddam's son-in-law, did say that Iraq had WMD capabilities. Additionally, many inspections by UNSCOM (and later UNMOVIC [United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission] post-1999) and the IAEA were often not allowed to perform full inspections. For example, the IAEA alleged that they were not allowed into facilities until after suspicious materials were removed from the site. Once UNMOVIC, which replaced UNSCOM after 1999, was formed, Iraq refused to allow inspection teams unconditional access to weapons facilities and sites.

Iraq continued to refuse weapons inspectors until Resolution 1441 in 2002 where Iraq did seem to be cooperating although UNMOVIC stated that they believe not all suspicious weapons were being accounted for. As the war drew closer and closer, the United States and United Kingdom released reports alleging further Iraqi non-cooperation with inspections as well as Iraq acquiring more WMD materials, as well as resolutions to Iraq demanding full disarmament.

I believe that the United States and other countries, specifically the UK, overestimated, intentionally or unintentionally, the weapons capabilities of Iraq. I think they failed to realize just how decisive a victory the Gulf War was for them and how much it crippled Iraq's military capabilities. Let us consider all of this.

1) The US and other countries believed Iraq's weapons capabilities were substantial and a continued threat when, in fact, these capabilities were overestimated.

2) International organizations (UNSCOM, later UNMOVIC, and IAEA) and Iraqi defectors believed Iraq still had WMD capabilities.

3) Iraq defied Resolution 687 (destruction and removal of all WMDs and associated facilities [as well as UNSCOM inspections]) for over a decade.

It really isn't. Both of those people truly are scum.

Good luck in the future on being unbiased.

[eran]

i hope bush dies a painful death like his little gay friend ariel sharon

Sharon is not death... (and is not gay, he got a wife and another one after the first die)

[Admiral Piett]

If we absolutely must have gone to war, it should have been with a legitimate threat. At least something useful to our national security would have been accomplished.

[Viking Prince]

If we absolutely must have gone to war, it should have been with a legitimate threat. At least something useful to our national security would have been accomplished.

So when Saddam invaded Kuwait and could then threaten the Saudi and the smaller gulf states oil production, this was not a credible threat to our national security? After Saddam agreed to a ceasefire and then proceeded to not honor the cease fire, what should the USA do? We are already over there supervising the ceasefire and putting our personnel and reputation at stake. He plays cat and mouse as outlined in Lord Rahl's post as well as my prior post. What are the options? Stay and do nothing until.... Withdraw at just let him off the hook. Take him out. I still think we made the correct decision. With Saddam's ego -- he would continue to challange us until we acted.

[Lord William]

We must remember why saddam went into kuwait to begin with, it was all the oil issue since kuwait drilled into iraqi oil reserves and started to sell it..... in my opinion that was justified

[Lord Rahl]

Drilling into some else's oil reserves justifies war?

[Lord William]

well yeah it belongs to me if you try and take it. obviously i am going to fight for it back

[Banana Jelly]

Isn't that as Viking Prince say threatens National Security? Kuwaities drilling in Iraqi oil reserves are threatening national security, as Viking Prince defines it.

[Lord William]

what annoys me more is america does this all the time, they come into canada and take what isnt theirs to take for example the lumber incident where they came into canada and started cutting down trees and shipping them to the states with legal authorization