Quote:
Originally Posted by onetime2
Hussein continually thwarted weapons inspectors, attempted to assassinate former President Bush, used oil for food programs to import banned technology (missile parts, dual use chemicals and equipment, banned weapons, etc), attempted to shoot down American planes in the no-fly zones, continued to build his military capabilities, modified missiles to extend their range(s), and continually claimed he wasn't doing any of these things. Each time he would be given a deadline, it would pass, then, when confronted with irrefutable proof, he'd admit to his violations and claim that now he needed time to comply with the aforementioned terms of the cease-fire. He did this for the better part of a decade with the world knowing full well what he was doing.
And yes, now countries do face the prospect of regime change. In the last 30 years the US hasn't put its military at substantial risk to achieve political ends. That's no longer the case. Of course, it's unlikely we'll be doing it again in the near future but there was most assuredly a price paid by Hussein's regime and by the leaders of the Taliban.
|
This is just going around in circles. We are presented with a bunch of reasons to go to war and when those reasons are shown to be bogus, we are presented with some other reasons and the previous reasons are just ignored. Yesterday some idiot on TV was even saying that the war in Iraq was necessary because there are more terrorists in Iraq than in any other country in the world, conveniently ignoring the fact that the terrorists are only in Iraq because of the invasion.
What it boils down to is that Saddam was supposed to have presented a threat to the US, but no matter how long this argument goes on, not one credible threat has ever been produced. Missiles that can fly 200km are not a threat to the US. Paying money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers is not a threat to the US. Violating UN Security Council resolutions is not a threat to the US and is hypocritical. Using the oil-for-food money to build new palaces and buy funky sound systems is not a threat to the US. And using an alleged plot to kill Daddy Bush as a justification, a plot that has never even been proven to have existed, is just not even worth going into. Although given that the US has made it no secret that they'd like to assassinate Saddam, I'm sure you'd be understanding if Iraq invaded the US in return.
So basically the US invaded Iraq because Saddam shot at their planes in the no-fly zone.