Is the IRAQ WAR the 'central front' of the war on TERRORR?

Question

I thought we were attacked by a renegade Saudi prince and his tiny group of followers, who rambles off these lengthy tirades about an insane pseudo-religious crusade of monopolizing middle eastern oil, hellbent on world domination. He pulled off this clever airplanes attack, but they'll not get away with that one again. idk, the whole thing with forcing Iraq to be a 'democracy' seems a little odd. Saddam was a ruthless dictator, sure, but Iraq was a place people could visit, and the cultural value of their art and music remains some of the oldest and most treasured in the world. I work at a museum, so I don't just hate entire countries. Now, after maybe 1,000,000 dead Iraqis, ten times that maimed, half the population displaced, homeless refugees. No running water or electricity in many places, the stench of f***s and death in the war torn cities.. I just have a hard time making the connection back to 9/11... especially since Bush himself stated "Iraq had no WMD, and no connection to 9/11"

source: youtube "Bush Admits Iraq Had No WMD"

Answer 1

and now there is a terrorist in the Republican Party by the name of Sarah Palin

She and the AIP wanted to separate Alaska from the US

Answer 2

Your post contains so many false statements that space would not permit clearing them all up.  There aren't a million dead Iraqis, and your other claims are equally unsupportable by facts.

The short answer is that ever since we went to war against terrorists (i.e. the insurgents) in Iraq, how many terror attacks have there been in the U.S.?  That would be ZERO.  That tells me it was the right thing to do.

Yes, we were attacked by Saudis, and the Saudi situation is very complex.  But again, no one from Saudi Arabia has attacked us again since we went to Iraq, either, have they?

And you can't view the physical situation in Iraq through the eyes of an American, where full-time cell service, a Starbucks within 2 blocks, and free wireless internet are considered sacred rights.  Many of the houses never had electricity and stank like f***s to begin with.

Learning about an issue requires more than listening to DNC talking points.

Answer 3

http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/20...

http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/20...

Answer 4

No, I think that this election is now the central war on terror. If Obama is elected the terrorists will win because we'll sell the farm to stay out of another war.

Answer 5

Bush lied to us many times in the past 8 years.

Here is a list of the accomplishments of the Bush administration.

* Misleading us about Iraq's WMD

* Implying a connection between Saddam and 9/11

* Launching a war that's killed 4, 150 Americans and wounded more than 30, 000

* Challenging Iraqi insurgents to attack U.S. troops: "Bring 'em on"

* Granting no-bid contracts to Halliburton in Iraq

* Failing to respond to Hurricane Katrina

* Hiring unqualified crony to run FEMA

* Praising crony's performance: "Brownie, you're doing a heckuva job"

* Neglecting reconstruction of New Orleans' homes and levees Promising American troops would be greeted as liberators

* Declaring "Mission Accomplished" and later blaming the banner on troops

* Cherry-picking facts about WMDs in Iraq, then blaming the CIA

* Promising the Iraq war would lower gas prices

* Claiming the Iraqi insurgency was in its "last throes" in 2005

* Allowing Osama Bin Laden to escape

* Launching a war that's killed countless Iraqi civilians

* Using Terri Schiavo for political gain

* Attempting to alter Constitution to allow discrimination against g*y people

* Wiretapping our phones without court order

* Stealing the 2000 election (remember Katherine Harris, voter purges, and the Supreme Court?)

* Concealing the pre-9/11 Presidential Daily Briefing entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S."

* Enforcing abstinence-only programs in public schools

* Rejecting the Kyoto Treaty to stop climate change

* Giving tax cuts to the rich while spending record amounts

* Failing seniors with the costly Medicare prescription drug benefit

* Swiftboating John Kerry

* Outing CIA agent Valerie Plame to retaliate for truth about Iraq's WMDs

* Telling the 45 million uninsured Americans to just go to the emergency room

* Spending $341 million a day in Iraq (Iraq has a budget surplus)

* Neglecting wounded soldiers at Walter Reed Medical Center

* Allowing Afghanistan to fall into chaos, with the Taliban and al Qaeda regaining control

* Holding prisoners without trial at Guantanamo Bay

* Covering up torture at Abu Ghraib

* Breaking the Geneva Conventions

* Forcing the Patriot Act into law

* Turning a budget surplus into massive budget deficit

* Letting more than a million homes go into foreclosure—the highest rate ever recorded

* Setting the record for most days on vacation by any president in U.S. history

* Increasing nuclear threat by withdrawing from Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with Russia

* Holding secret meetings with Exxon Mobil, Conoco, Shell, and BP to set energy policy

* Letting gas prices double while resisting fuel efficiency and clean energy  

Answer 6

well,if you believe what you're told. terror is a big money business. these people live in caves and cant do squat without our backing. question our government. i wonder what the governments credit rating is? if you question authority you're unamerican. they cant lose. and we get poor

Answer 7

I'd say that the Iraq war is a distraction from the central front of the war on terror.

Answer 8

the war on "terror" isn't a war. bin laden, who attacked us and roams free isn't there and never has been. when you are in a war you know it. this is not a war.

Answer 9

Long rant with little facts do nothing to convince others or support a healthy debate. Just a waste of space and energy.

Answer 10

The world believed Iraq had WMDs and most of the Democrats,Dont blame Bush.

Answer 11

The "central Front" as you eloquently put it is simple.Papa Bush was "threatened" by Saddam/maddas.So baby Bush just looked high and low and low and behold we were attacked 9/11(I take that VERYseriously),BUT that was baby Bush's VALID reason to "get"Saddam.Now we are in a murderous war that has destroyed our standing as a world leader and darn near bankruptedd 3/4 of americans.The rest are coming back from over seas with debilitating "brain injuries" that are somewhat similar to "shaken babysyndromem" only 100x worse.Seriously,GOD help America.Bush ain't,E

Answer 12

Yesterday, today it's the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Edit: dpswims...why must you paste that on every topic?

Answer 13

IN EARLY 1998, the Clinton administration, following this same logic, prepared for war against Iraq. On February 17, President Clinton spoke on the steps of the Pentagon to explain to the American people why war was necessary. The speech is worth excerpting at length, because it was then and remains today the fundamental case for the invasion of Iraq and the removal of Saddam Hussein from power.

President Clinton declared that the great threat confronting the United States and its allies was a lethal and "unholy axis" of international terrorists and outlaw states. "They will be all the more lethal if we allow them to build arsenals of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them." There was, Clinton declared, "no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein's Iraq. His regime threatens the safety of his people, the stability of his region and the security of all the rest of us." Before the Gulf War of 1991, Clinton noted, "Saddam had built up a terrible arsenal, and he had used it. Not once, but many times in a decade-long war with Iran, he used chemical weapons against combatants, against civilians, against a foreign adversary and even against his own people." At the end of the Gulf War, Saddam had promised to reveal all his programs and disarm within 15 days. But instead, he had spent "the better part of the past decade trying to cheat on this solemn commitment." As Clinton explained:

Iraq repeatedly made false declarations about the weapons that it had left in its possession after the Gulf War. When UNSCOM would then uncover evidence that gave the lie to those declarations, Iraq would simply amend the reports. For example, Iraq revised its nuclear declarations four times within just 14 months, and it has submitted six different biological warfare declarations, each of which has been rejected by UNSCOM.

In 1995 Hussein Kamal, Saddam's son-in-law and the chief organizer of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program, defected to Jordan. He revealed that Iraq was continuing to conceal weapons and missiles and the capacity to build many more. Then and only then did Iraq admit to developing numbers of weapons in significant quantities--and weapons stocks. Previously it had vehemently denied the very thing it just simply admitted once Saddam's son-in-law defected to Jordan and told the truth.

Now listen to this: What did it admit? It admitted, among other things, an offensive biological warfare capability, notably, 5,000 gallons of botulinum, which causes botulism; 2,000 gallons of anthrax; 25 biological-filled Scud warheads; and 157 aerial bombs. And I might say UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq has actually greatly understated its production. . . .

Next, throughout this entire process, Iraqi agents have undermined and undercut UNSCOM. They've harassed the inspectors, lied to them, disabled monitoring cameras, literally spirited evidence out of the back doors of suspect facilities as inspectors walked through the front door, and our people were there observing it and had the pictures to prove it. . . .

Over the past few months, as [the weapons inspectors] have come closer and closer to rooting out Iraq's remaining nuclear capacity, Saddam has undertaken yet another gambit to thwart their ambitions by imposing debilitating conditions on the inspectors and declaring key sites which have still not been inspected off limits, including, I might add, one palace in Baghdad more than 2,600 acres large. . . .

One of these presidential sites is about the size of Washington, D.C. . . .

It is obvious that there is an attempt here, based on the whole history of this operation since 1991, to protect whatever remains of his capacity to produce weapons of mass destruction, the missiles to deliver them, and the feed stocks necessary to produce them. The UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq still has stockpiles of chemical and biological munitions, a small force of Scud-type missiles, and the capacity to restart quickly its production program and build many, many more weapons. . . . Please democrats take responsibility for the war!!!!!!!

Answer 14

Here's how I see it and I don't have all the facts.  To pull out troops from Iraq would leave a huge gaping hole for terrorists to combine their efforts and work on destroying what they hate most, being us!  Keeping a base in Iraq to me is essential in keeping our eyes on the middle east.  

Saddam was a evil ruler who needed to be silenced.  Anyone who throws babies against a wall to murder them, needs to be silenced permanently.  Whether or not their were WMD's or whether or not Bin Laden was using this as his place of refuge makes little difference to me.

Keeping our troops in Iraq means keeping my kids safe here at home.

Sincerely,

Michelle