• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Was Invading Iraq the Right Choice?

Was invading Iraq and going to war in Iraq, was it the right choice?


  • Total voters
    96
Iraq didnt kill 3,000 Americans. Actually no country did. It was a small group called Al Qaeda did...

True. However, there was a nation that supported Al Qaeda and knowingly allowed it to operate within its borders. Not Iraq but Afghanistan. That's why Afghanistan should have been Carpet-NUKED on September 12, 2001. The reason to assassinate Hussein had to do with his part in active plans to assassinate former POTUS George Bush (Sr).
 
True. However, there was a nation that supported Al Qaeda and knowingly allowed it to operate within its borders. Not Iraq but Afghanistan. That's why Afghanistan should have been Carpet-NUKED on September 12, 2001. The reason to assassinate Hussein had to do with his part in active plans to assassinate former POTUS George Bush (Sr).

I agree that Islamic Afghanistan was providing protection to Al-Qaeda but i dont believe a nuclear bomb would be the answer. Afterall Al-Qaeda is a very small group. I beleive surgical strikes were the right thing to do but a full force invasion i disagree with.
 
So we are nearing the 10th anniversary of the Iraq war, and with that happening and looking back 10 years ago i have a quick question for you guys here.
With all that happened, the regime change in Iraq, all the deaths, controversery and what not; Was invading Iraq and going to war in Iraq, was it the right choice?

Right choice? Absolutely!!!

Handled correctly? No way.

Many of the problems we ran into in Iraq were of our own making because we didn't handle the post invasion correctly.

Saddam was a evil bastard who in the past had used poison gas, first against Iran and later he wiped out one of his own villages with it, supported and tortured people, associated, supported and was friendly with socialist, raped and killed innocent victims, supported terrorism (PLO and possibly others), invaded his neighbor, etc. He even could of stopped the invasion before it began by simply allowing the UN inspectors unfettered access.

Invading and taking him out was definitely the right choice, but we should of had a better plan of what to do afterwards.
 
I agree that Islamic Afghanistan was providing protection to Al-Qaeda but i dont believe a nuclear bomb would be the answer. Afterall Al-Qaeda is a very small group. I beleive surgical strikes were the right thing to do but a full force invasion i disagree with.

also there's the question of "what do you nuke?" Afghanistan wasn't really a target rich environment at the time.
 
I agree that Islamic Afghanistan was providing protection to Al-Qaeda but i dont believe a nuclear bomb would be the answer. Afterall Al-Qaeda is a very small group. I beleive surgical strikes were the right thing to do but a full force invasion i disagree with.

I'm not talking one nuke. I'm talking Carpet-Nuking the ENTIRE COUNTRY. It wasn't worth losing a single soldier over that worthless piece of ground. Additionally it would take out both the Al Queda and Taliban personnel AND the poppy fields. Damn. Three birds with one stone.
 
I'm not talking one nuke. I'm talking Carpet-Nuking the ENTIRE COUNTRY. It wasn't worth losing a single soldier over that worthless piece of ground. Additionally it would take out both the Al Queda and Taliban personnel AND the poppy fields. Damn. Three birds with one stone.

Yes using nuclear bomb on a 3rd world backward tribal country will go over real good with the international community. Real logically and realistic choice there. :roll:
 
Yes using nuclear bomb on a 3rd world backward tribal country will go over real good with the international community. Real logically and realistic choice there. :roll:

If you haven't noticed, I really couldn't care any less what the UN or the International Community feel about ANYTHING.
 
If you haven't noticed, I really couldn't care any less what the UN or the International Community feel about ANYTHING.

Yea exactly.. Thank god your not in a place of power..
 
everything!!!!!!

so...US kills 40 million people, remnant of AQ and the Talib flee to Pakistan and start over? good plan.
 
so...US kills 40 million people, remnant of AQ and the Talib flee to Pakistan and start over? good plan.

If the Pakis make the mistake of allowing them in, then we do the same thing to them.
 
If the Pakis make the mistake of allowing them in, then we do the same thing to them.

To be honest it probably wasn't a mistake, the Muslim world (and not to mention quite a lot of others) hate America and will do anything to hamper its objectives.
 
If the Pakis make the mistake of allowing them in, then we do the same thing to them.

ok now our death toll is +100,000,000 (take that Germany!) and the entire Muslim world had declared total war on us.
 
To be honest it probably wasn't a mistake, the Muslim world (and not to mention quite a lot of others) hate America and will do anything to hamper its objectives.

ok now our death toll is +100,000,000 (take that Germany!) and the entire Muslim world had declared total war on us.

There are two types of people in the world.... your Allies and your Enemies. If you aren't one of the first (which I don't believe the US actually has any of), then you ARE one of the second.
 
There are two types of people in the world.... your Allies and your Enemies. If you aren't one of the first (which I don't believe the US actually has any of), then you ARE one of the second.

Neutrals?
 
The oil companies back in Iraq for the first time since 1973 believe it was the right choice.

I don't like it whatsoever that oil dependency controls our military policy, especially knowing we have other options. Drive Electric: Military - YouTube

That's not the say I think President Bush was not fully convinced Saddam Hussein was on the path of having WMDs that he would use directly or indirectly against the American people and led the nation to war with Iraq over nothing greater than his concern for us. What I'm saying is the complex circumstances that led to the war were created by the monopoly petroleum had and still has over the American people and our ability in engage in commerce. The quicker we have other viable transportation energy options, the better for a peaceful world and I think over the mid term, a more robust US economy.

The Future Is Electric Cars: Fmr. GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz | Daily Ticker - Yahoo! Finance
 
There's no such thing. If you will not march with me, I have to assume you're marching against me and treat you as a potential threat.

How about I just walk away from you and leave you alone to do your own thing?
 
How about I just walk away from you and leave you alone to do your own thing?

That's fine. Just realize that if you reach into your pocket as you're walking away you're likely gonna get shot in the back because I don't know what it is you're reaching into that pocket for.
 
That's fine. Just realize that if you reach into your pocket as you're walking away you're likely gonna get shot in the back because I don't know what it is you're reaching into that pocket for.

Thats just paranoia. Im British, the British would NEVER attack modern America as it is the "Special Relationship" If anything America is walking away from Britain at the moment over the Falklands, Tony Blair lied to the populace to follow Bush into Iraq and Afghanistan thats dedication.
 
Other
no vote
Then, along with Bush and the conservatives, I'd say "yes".
Now, NO
We should learn to think before leaping ; see prior to jumping , which seems so easy, yet is not.
emotions were involved.
Have we learned anything from this....from this place, I'd say NO.
 
Thats just paranoia. Im British, the British would NEVER attack modern America as it is the "Special Relationship" If anything America is walking away from Britain at the moment over the Falklands, Tony Blair lied to the populace to follow Bush into Iraq and Afghanistan thats dedication.

It's not paranoia when everyone IS out to get you. The whole "Special Relationship" thing is garbage so far as I'm concerned. Then again I'm an Isolationist at heart.
 
It's not paranoia when everyone IS out to get you. The whole "Special Relationship" thing is garbage so far as I'm concerned. Then again I'm an Isolationist at heart.

Why isn't that surprising from what ive seen.
 
There are two types of people in the world.... your Allies and your Enemies. If you aren't one of the first (which I don't believe the US actually has any of), then you ARE one of the second.

When did we become the Sith? WTF happened to peace and commerce with all nations?
 
It's not paranoia when everyone IS out to get you. The whole "Special Relationship" thing is garbage so far as I'm concerned. Then again I'm an Isolationist at heart.
This depends on one's mental health and how this affects one's outlook...
So, its OK, T....your "philosophy" , and I hope that you are smart enough NOT to posses a gun....as I am...
After all, bullets have no effect on ghosts.

Two types, Tig ?
How about the 90% who simply do not care about us, do not even know us (99.9%).
I buy not, neither friend nor enemy....thats for the developing children...adults learn the truth over time.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom