It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Are You For Or Against The War In Iraq?

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in


posted on May, 17 2005 @ 04:39 PM
Alot of people on ATS express their views on the ongoing war in Iraq.

And this thread is for people to answer just two questions that i have:

1. Do you support the war in Iraq? (This also includes if you did but no longer do).

2. Why? (Your reasons for being for or against the war)!

I just wanted to know if the majority of ATS is for/against the war!

posted on May, 17 2005 @ 04:48 PM
I have always supported and still support the War in Iraq.

I supported the war because Saddam was in violation of the cease fire agreement with the U.S. and allies from the original Gulf war as well as all later UN Security Council resolutions. I also supported it because I thought it would be good long-term for the Iraqi people and the region in general.

Oh I forgot to mention Saddam was also firing on U.S. and British planes monitoring the no-fly zone under UN mandate.

[edit on 5/17/2005 by djohnsto77]

posted on May, 17 2005 @ 04:53 PM
I do not support this "War".

It is without true validation.

posted on May, 17 2005 @ 04:55 PM

Originally posted by djohnsto77
I have always supported and still support the War in Iraq.

I supported the war because Saddam was in violation of the cease fire agreement with the U.S. and allies from the original Gulf war as well as all later UN Security Council resolutions. I also supported it because I thought it would be good long-term for the Iraqi people and the region in general.[edit on 5/17/2005 by djohnsto77]
I would have to agree with this post. The Saddam Hussein was, indeed, in violation of the cease fire agreement and treaties signed at the end of the first Gulf War. US and GB were well within their rights to finish the job that they started. And a world without Saddam is a better place. And if a little democracy were injected into the Arab world -- a world of despotic leaders, absolute tyrants, and of religious leaders who don't care a whit for their own people, so much the better. This war isn't against Islam, it's a war to attempt to restore basic order, civic as well human rights and dignity to the Arab people.

posted on May, 17 2005 @ 04:58 PM
I'm totally against the war, as it was patently started on false premises. Nobody gave Bush the mandate to go and fix the crooked dictator. Intel data was manipulated into a manufactured WMD story. That's disgusting.

In addition, this war is one of the main reasons our country is experiencing a great fiscal crisis and the govt debt is unprecedentedly high. I feel angry thinking about how my country was sabotaged by self-centered megalomaniacs.

posted on May, 17 2005 @ 05:07 PM

The war could have been justified had it been fought on the premise of removing Saddam Hussein - a genocidal dictator - from power. Instead, it was fought under the pretence that Iraq posed an immediate threat to the USA and Britain. It did not. Iraq only ever posed a danger to Israel, an "ally" which has shamelessly accepted the aid, protection and preferential treatment of America without giving anything in return.

posted on May, 17 2005 @ 05:09 PM
I support the war, and for several reasons.

First, I believe there were, in fact, weapons of mass destruction. While how to handle Iraq was still on the UN table, everyone was in agreement that Saddam had and was producing WMDs. France, Germany, and Russia all had intel pointing to this, as well as the US. Russia had more intel on these WMDs than we did. Yet, when invasion became the word of the day, suddenly these three countries forgot about their intel. They forgot about what they had been saying, and started saying it was unilateral US CIA intel talking about the WMDs. Besides that, both parties in the US, the democrats and republicans were both on board with making Saddam give up his WMDs. Kerry himself made a comment to this effect. Yet, that turned to politics when Bush decided to go a head with Iraqi Freedom. Suddenly all the democrats forgot about the statements they had said and started making the exact opposite. Oh, and, of course, the media let them get away with it.

Second, freedom for the people of Iraq. The US has the ability to liberate people being oppressed, and I believe it is our responsability to use this ability. I think we should be a lot more active in this regard. Saddam was a horrible, horrible man; Iraq and the world are better off without him being in power. He tortured his people and idolized Hitler. We liberated Iraq from this monster, and now are trying to stabilize a country that hasn't had any semblance of freedom for over 20 years.

Finally, the liberation of Iraq will serve as an alternative to the peoples of the middle east. They're going to see first hand the differences between a totalitarian government and a representative democracy. Then, the people will get to choose. It may not be a clean transition, but revolutions rarely are. Yet, we have given the little people, the pleebes, the nobodies in these middle eastern nations hope, a light, if you will. Granted, the dictators in the individual nations won't be too keen on losing total control, and will express that via the "people" through state run news agencies. However, due to the United States' liberation of Iraq, a young girl born in a middle eastern country no longer has to accept life as less than a slave.

Those are three of the principle reasons I am for the war in Iraq. There are several others, too, but there are the prime reasons.

posted on May, 17 2005 @ 05:21 PM
I am 100% for the war in Iraq.

I do agree that Tony Blair and George W Bush exagerated the truth to take us to war and i also believe that if they had just told the truth the public would have supported the war, but Saddam had to be taken from power in Iraq by any means neccasary.

The UN had let him off too many times and it was time something was done about it!

Good on you Tony and George!

posted on May, 17 2005 @ 05:22 PM
I am against the war in Iraq

1. Because it's bush's way of finishing what is father started, and his way to gain control over the oil fields

2. We shouldnt have to protect any other countries at our own expense, let them kill themselves, it's their choice

3. Why should innocent people have to die because the US govt. is greedy and full of themselves


posted on May, 17 2005 @ 05:23 PM
Yeah, I support the war, although I'm not very enthusiastic about it. I thought then that there reallywere WMDs; it seems that there weren't after all. My guess is that Bush & Co thought so, too, and got bad intel; but then, I'm not a conspiracy-weenie.

I think Bush's real reason for going to war was to do some "nation-building", despite his denial of it; having a "westernized" Iraq a la Turkey would be a tremendous counterbalance to Iran and Syria and could perhaps destabilize them into more westernized and democratic countries. This may actually work; it certainly has resulted in some movement towards democracy in places like Lebanon and there is even movement towards freedom (although not very much) in Saudi, the Emirates, Libya, and Egypt.

And of course an underlying reason for going in was to ensure a stable and long-term a supply of petroleum for us, which I suppose is as good a reason to go to war as any other.

One good bit of news is that, since we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, there haven't been any terror attacks on US soil that I'm aware of.

posted on May, 17 2005 @ 05:26 PM
That's interesting: So far:

five for,
three against,
one undecided

posted on May, 17 2005 @ 05:32 PM
I do not support the illegal war, and occupation of Iraq for several reasons. For starters anyone who knows anything about politics, knows that this war was NOT about Saddam (we put him in power to begin with), WMD's (saddams WMDs were long expired), spreading Freedom (last time I checked Iraq still looked like it was an occupied war zone, oh yeah it is)or anything else for that matter. This war was planned since 1996-97 and it's sole purpose was economic interest. Anyone who denies this is either lying, or simply ignorant. If ignorance is the case for anyone let me know I can give you some links.

Second, I find nothing glorious about bombing the living Heil out of a country that is technologically inferior to us. Everyone wants to scream how brave our soldiers are, when the sad fact of the matter is, we will not fight a war without first bombing said country to the ground in order to ensure minimum American casualties, whilst maximizing "enemy", and civillian deaths.

Third, I find Americas current path of economic, and social imperialism to be thoroughly sickenning, considering the fact that we are supposedly spreading "American" values like freedom, and liberty abroad, whilst our own liberties are being slowly erroded here at home.

Fourth, the cost to our economy has been devastating. We went from a projected surplus to Bush racking up the biggest deficit in our nations history, and we will not truly see the effects until another 10 years or so from now. One after another social programs are being cut, to pay for this debacle. There is plenty we could of taken care of with that 300+ billion (?) had we invested it in our own nation, instead of Iraq. Sadly if humanity is still around, it will be my children, and their children dealing with, and paying for, the gross incompetence, and outright negligence of the current administration.

Fifth, War is never an answer. There is nothing glorious about the systematic destruction of human life.

I could go on, and on, and on (depleted uranium shells, environmental impact, international law, etc, etc but I won't)

War in Iraq

posted on May, 17 2005 @ 06:31 PM
I'm against it because:

1. I was never convinced that Iraq was a threat at this point. They were contained very well.

2. I do not feel that notions of democracy can be planted by exerting power over people. If anything, it will numb ambitions of freedom and democracy.

3. The innocent people always suffer the most. War should only be an option when absolutely, 100% necessary. I never thought Bush's evidence spelled out "absolutely necessary".

For the record though, I was for the presense of U.S and UN. military power in the region to keep containing Saddam Hussein.

posted on May, 17 2005 @ 07:06 PM
I am completey behind the war in Iraq.

I think the U.S. was and still is attempting to defend itself against terrorist organizations that have not been given enough notice in the past, before the World Trade Center fell. I believe Iraq was a safe haven for these evil people. I believe the world is a much better place without Saddam. I do not believe President Bush intentionally misled anone.

Further more, I am grateful to Tony Blair and the citizens of the U.K. for supporting the U.S. in this. I think the U.K. could have very easily been a future target for these poeple.

posted on May, 17 2005 @ 07:09 PM
I don't support this war. Along with c 2 million others I marched in London to protest and was ignored. Like millions in the UK I voted against the Government that lied to conduct an illegal war unfortunately not enough people did likewise.


It was illegal under international law

It undermined the the UN

It undermined the UK's traditional pro-Arab stance

It strengthens Israel's dominant regional position

It removed an important secular bastion in an area of islamic-fundamentalism

It gave many disparate Arab factions a common enemy & cause

It cowed the world

It's cost the lives of 87 of our troops, over 1,500 of yours and thousands of Iraqis (and counting!)

War shouldn't be fought for corporate profit

It sets a precedent allowing any strong country to invade anyone it can

It confirmed our subserviant position to the US in policy and the use of our armed forces

I don't being lied to

posted on May, 17 2005 @ 07:15 PM
This will come as a suprise to a lot of people here but I am AGAINST the war.

The problem is Bush didnt listen to me and went in anyway.

So now we are in a freaking mess with innocents dying on both sides with more bloodshed if we stay and even MORE bloodshed if we leave. Its too late to keep bitching about us going in we are already there. I think if we pull out now we will see a slaughter that makes this look tame.

The question is how is the best way to fix this cluster #

I hope and pray for the poor Iraqi people and my fellow countrymen that are dying over there every day that something can be worked out soon.

Like it or not all three sides (Iraqis, Insurgents, and USA) are going to have to have a seat at the table for it to work.

posted on May, 17 2005 @ 07:18 PM
I keep hearing the term 'illegal war' from people, but have yet to find out a good explanation on how it was illegal. At least from the perspective of the United States, I don't see how any war approved by Congress and executed by the President could possibly be illegal, but beyond that we have the breaking of the cease-fire agreements from Gulf War I and further UN resolutions. Even if, as you anti-war people say, Bush & Blair lied and there were no WMDs etc., I still don't see how that affects the situation at all.

[edit on 5/17/2005 by djohnsto77]

posted on May, 17 2005 @ 07:22 PM
im for us winning but against the invasion itself.

posted on May, 17 2005 @ 07:26 PM

Originally posted by djohnsto77
I don't see how any war approved by Congress and executed by the President could possibly be illegal

That's a narrow tunnel, look out for the light at the end of it.

Why would you consider the "president" to be above his duty of truth, or the US to be above international law?

posted on May, 17 2005 @ 07:41 PM
originaly i was for the war. i was under the impression that it was justified and percieved the wmd's to be a ligitimate reason.

unfortunately i have come to see it as the farce that it is, no wmd's and reasons that shift to suit the purpose of the us. therefore seeing the war as illigitimate i now do not support it in the least.

i never liked sadam but as HE IS the lmost ligitimate leader that they have, that if the PEOPLE had wanted him out they would have at least tried to do something about it. since the was no upriseing or anything against him there was no right to remove him from power. all that has caused is to destableize the region further than it was already.

dictateing democracy on a country will do nothing to further the cause of democracy. democracy to me means CHOICE. by the very fact that there was no choice involved to ask for democracy, it only detracts from what democracy stands for. demacracy also stands for rights and the freedom to choose. again the fact that democracy was forced onto people by an outside influance especialy through an invasion and subsequent occupation by democratic nations has poisoned what democracy is all about.

SHOW ME THE WMD"S. that was the reason that the war was presumably started. SO WHERE ARE THEY? it seems taht sadam was not hideing any. there has been more than enough time to locate at least SOME wmd's had they been a REAL threat. it seems that perhapse sadam wasn't interfereing with the inspections to hide wmd's, but out of anger and frustration of being harrased for no real reason. just as many would react to their property being searched on little more than rumer for something that does not exist.

sadam was definately a (beep), but in all honesty he was no worse than many world leaders. in fact he was realy no worse than leaders that the us has supported and continues to support to this day.

it seems more and more that the real purpose of this war is to secure oil and project the "mighty power" of the states into an unstable reagen of the world. by installing a puppet regime, there are the rewards of military bases in the region. at a time when many in countries like saudi arabia, where there were bases, have been increaseing pressure to remove said bases. and of course the oil that the country contains that every nation needs.

it seems that the will of the people is the last thing that was considdered. if the people truly don't back this "democracy" that was forced upon them, that it will ultimately fail in the end. all this war has realy done is to impress upon that and other nations in the area that their beliefs about western civilization and democracy being a bad thing is true.

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in