originally posted in:Sapphire
View Entire Topic
Was it justified?
The justification most people use is that Iraq was believed (without actual evidence) of having nuclear weapons, and the fact the government was run by an evil dictator.
However, there were no nuclear weapons and nor had they the capability to launch them at the US. The war brought Al-Qaeda into the country and created a civil war between the the two main religions (granted, that was more or less unpredictable).
Still, you can't go to war over a baseless threat. There simply was no evidence Iraq had any nuclear weapons other than Saddam Hussein's threats.
And of course evil dictators must always be brought down, but not by a full blown war. There are many other countries standing right now that have evil dictators, but you solve the issue through revolutions like the Arab Spring. If the people want it, then help them, but you can't force it onto them.
What's your opinion on the Iraq War?
EDIT: I forgot to mention that this war paid on credit - one of the most unintelligent decisions ever made in US history since Hoover's inaction during the Great Depression.
-
He says a dictator will be brought down, but also claims a full war is unnecessary. Dumb logic, which ignores the other variables involved anyway. To site the Arab spring as evidence that liberation from a first world nation is unnecessary is beyond moronic. The Iraqi people barely had the resources to fend off his loyalists, and some didn't even do that. It was justified in the sense that Saddam was not only a threat to his people but also neighboring states, hence what happened in the 90s. The only valid thing you said is that they didn't have WMDs.