Posted by: al66888 | July 16, 2007

Iraq: A Comprehensive Look. Part I- The President’s Reasons to Invade

Iraq, and everything that surrounds it and comes from it (IE terrorism, homeland security, etc) is still a major issue (if not THE major issue) of the United States.  Over the next several days/weeks I am going to attempt to break down Iraq and shed as much light as possible on it.   I am doing this for several reasons:

  1. I think it would be great to have 1 place that gets everything out in the open.  The rights, the wrongs, the reasons, and the misconceptions.
  2. I think, like wikipedia, it would be a great opportunity for everyone to add their thoughts, ideas, fears, and knowledge thus benefiting all who want to know a little more.
  3. I think that there is a great deal of people in this country that don’t understand the dynamic behind this war, and why defeat is not an option. 

The first part in this series will be The President’s Reasons to Invade.  The reasons to invade in this article are going to vary- from the reasons given to us by the President, to the reasons military experts site, to everything in-between.  The purpose of this article is NOT to try and sway anyone’s opinion for or against this war, but rather to lay it all out there- the good, the bad, and the ugly.  And trust me, there is plenty of it all.  I will, as the author, add my opinion in to certain areas.  This is strictly opinion, and represents my opinion alone.  I encourage everyone out there to comment agree/disagree with my opinions and provide their own.   I just ask that you give me the reasons instead of calling me a ‘war-monger’ or something of the like.

The President’s Reasons for going to war

The first we’ve all heard a thousand times.  If you haven’t heard these before, chances are you live under a rock, don’t own a television, and/or this is your first time on the internet (hey, thanks for chosing our site as your first stop).  Like I said in the beginning though, we are going to look at everything, and we’re not going to try to slant this to make anyone (but our troops!) look good.  The President gave 3 main reasons for the invasion:

  1. Preventing the Iraqi’s from using ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction’
  2. Removing Sadam Hussein, and liberating the Iraqi people from an oppressive regime
  3. Protecting America from Terrorists

There were underlying reasons a well, but these are the main three, hammered over and over again, ad nauseum in speeches and the press.  Let’s just start at the big one- WMDs- the Weapons of Mass Destruction


Weapons of Mass Destruction became more of a political mantra than it was a military goal.  We knew Sadam had the weapons, we never physically found them, but we saw what they were capable of doing.  This is a link to the State Department’s site that lists the numerous mass graves that were found in Iraq.  There was a reason why Saddam Hussein was known as ‘The Butcher of Bagdahd’.   The closest thing, that we know of so far, that we did find, was a series of empty chemical containers.   You can find all sorts of information on these throughout the internet with varying degrees of what they are and what that meant.  Some of the most telling information came from Saddam’s former Air-Wise Marshall Georges Sada.  In an interview with Sada he said that they had chemical weapons, they used them on the Kurds, and talked of how they were flown out to Syria.  (If you would like to read or listen to the interview, here is a link to a partial transcript)

The whole WMD thing always amazed me. The way I looked at it, and still do, who cares if we never find/found a thing there. Would it really matter? Out of the 3 reasons listed here, the WMDs is the most irrelevant. If you topple Saddam, it wouldn’t matter if he had most of the weapons in the world, he still wouldn’t be able to use them. WMDs instead became the rally cry for politics, because every R, D, and I said he had them. They all had access to the same fact findings were all given the opportunity to read the same reports before the spoke and vote. The WMDs mean little when you see the mass graves. To me, it doesn’t matter if he used a chemical weapon or a firing squad- the end result is still the same.

Removing Saddam from Power

While I still believe that it was a stupid photo shoot, this is the reason that George W Bush appeared on an aircraft carrier with the banner ‘Mission Accomplished’.  And in this case, this particular mission was accomplished.  Now most of the media took this to mean the war in Iraq, but a war consists of several missions, and is not won (though could be lost) in just one.   President Bush went on to say that this mission is accomplished, and accomplished in a relatively short period of time given the fact that our troops were given a specific goal and they were allowed to act on it without interference from our politicians.  History will never forget the images of a toppling Saddam statue or ink stained fingers as the Iraqi’s had their first opportunity to vote. 

Both parties supported going into Iraq, and both parties members voted to send the troops there. There was a liteny of George W Bush quotes that have proceeded, but pretty much everyone was saying the same thing back then. It was not just the President, it was not just the Republicans. I could actually go on and on with Democrat quotes, so if you’d like, you can view a full selection here The point is not to rip on the D’s, but rather to show that at one (albeit very brief) point we all put politics aside and we were all in it together. Or was all of this just the politicking of the day?

Protecting America from Terrorists

It had long been thought that Saddam was both financing and giving safe haven to terrorists throughout Iraq.   Hillary Clinton said, “…..He has also given aid, comfort, and santuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members..”.   The thought process here was simple- if you accomplish removing Saddam, you will not only help to liberate the Iraqi people from a tyrant, but you will also bring unrest to the safe haven that terrorists enjoyed.   To this day, we are still fighting to make sure Iraq does not become another terrorist training camp and refuge.

There are varying degrees to this last one. As I said, ‘the simple thought was that removing Saddam would end the safe haven.’ That obviously has not been the case. I wouldn’t call Iraq a safe haven any longer, I would instead now classify it as a battleground for the terrorist. They lost a piece of comfort and they want it back. That is why you are seeing people pour over the borders into the country to take up the fight. This is key area for them, and they cannot afford to lose it (as we’ll explore later).

So this is the beginning of a very comprehensive look. To most, this is nothing new, but you still need to take a look at everything to see the whole picture.

The second part of this essay will talk about some of the players and how they are involved. Eventually we will look at the good, the bad, and the ugly, as well as resons that may not have made the papers, but are some of the strongest reasons to invade and remain today.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: