It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

The Justification of the Iraq War

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 05:52 PM
link   
On April 9th US forces entered Baghdad officially ending the tyrannical rule of Saddam Hussein. Because of continued commitment in Iraq, the country is now on the path to a successful democracy. Iraq war was clearly necessary to deny terrorists a base, complete the disarmament to Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction program, and to liberate the people of Iraq. We must understand these important objectives to understand how important victory in Iraq is.
One of the principal reasons to invade Iraq was to deny the terrorists a safe harbor in Iraq.

Saddam Hussein sponsored, harbored, and trained terrorists in Iraqi territory. During a statement to the Nine Eleven Commission Judith S. Yaphe she said “Baghdad actively sponsored terrorist groups, providing safe haven, training, arms, and logistical support, requiring in exchange that the groups carry out operations ordered by Baghdad for Saddam's objectives, Terrorist groups were not permitted to have offices, recruitment, or training facilities or freely use territory under the regime's direct control without explicit permission from Saddam.” Judith S. Yaphe is a distinguished research professor at the National Defense University in Washington D.C. These many terrorist groups included Fatah Revolutionary Council who is responsible for brutally murdering 22 people aboard Pan Am Flight 73 in Karachi, Pakistan. They also murdered Jordanian diplomats are believed to be behind multiple failed assassination attempts across Europe. The Palestinian Liberation Front who should be better known as Palestinians for the Annihilation of Israel was also harbored in Iraq. They were responsible for the hijacking the Italian cruise ship The Achille Lauro in the Mediterranean Sea during which one wheelchair bound American civilian was thrown overboard. When the PLF wasn’t throwing elderly civilians off cruise ships they were calling for suicide bomb attacks on Israel. After the cruise ship attack the PLF relocated to Baghdad, Iraq where they were harbored by Saddam Hussein. The most infamous terrorist sheltered in Iraq was none other then Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, former leader of Unification and Jihad to al Qaeda in Iraq.He personally beheaded American citizen Nicholas Berg and is credited with several other beheadings. Saddam Hussein had taken in some of the world’s most feared and reviled terrorists and provided them with shelter, training and funding, this was not to be tolerated and now these terrorists no longer have a safe haven in the new Republic of Iraq. It should be noted that the all the leaders on the terrorist organization mentioned before are all dead, one by suicide, and the other two died after being captured by US forces.
Another reason why Saddam had to go was he had weapons of mass destruction as well as development programs.

On April 3 1991 at the 2981st meeting of the United Nations Permanent Security Council, Resolution 687 was adopted. The resolution stated that “That Iraq shall unconditionally accept the destruction, removal, or rendering harmless, under international supervision, of:
(a) All chemical and biological weapons and all stocks of agents and all related subsystems and components and all research, development, support and manufacturing facilities.
Saddam Hussein and his government said they had complied with the resolution, abandoned there weapons and programs to produce them. During an interview with CBS news anchor Dan Rather, Saddam Hussein stated “And it was on that basis that Iraq actually accepted Resolution - accepted it, even though Iraq was absolutely certain that what it had said, what the Iraqi officials…had kept saying, that… Iraq was empty, was void of any such weapons, and was the case.” Saddam blatantly lied to the whole world .As our nations intelligence agencies including the Central Intelligence Agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency stated before the war; there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.




posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 05:53 PM
link   
Pete Hoekstra of the Congressional Select Committee of Intelligence said 500 chemical munitions were found by National Ground Intelligence Center. These weapons were found across Iraq. Saddam Hussein directed a campaign to deceive UN inspectors and thwart any attempts to disarm him. During the 1998 weapons inspections the chief of UN weapons inspection wrote in a report: “Iraq's conduct ensured that no progress was able to be made in either the fields of disarmament or accounting for Iraq's prohibited weapons program.” This opinion was shared by the President of the United States at the time as well. President Clinton stated “we turn our backs on his defiance, the credibility of U.S. power as a check against Saddam will be destroyed”. Saddam had originally only agreed to let the inspectors into the country after military action by the US and Britain was threatened. After the inspectors were kicked out military action fallowed. When inspectors returned again in 2003 Saddam once again deceived inspectors. According to the State Departments report on Iraq’s hidden weapons “"we assess that when the UN inspectors left Iraq they were unable to account for: up to 360 tones of bulk chemical warfare agent, including 1.5 tones of VX nerve agent.”. The report also stated Iraq was in possession of Samoud 2 missiles which violated the 150 kilometer limit set by the UN. The partisan leftist seditionists would have us take the word of a genocidal dictator over reports from our intelligence agencies and even the former president. Iraq was clearly in violation of UN Security Council Resolution 687, this resolution had to be enforced.

Transition: If Saddam’s violation of security council resolution was atrocious, then his human rights violations were appalling.

Iraq clearly posed a threat to the United States and our allies but the most important reason for military action in Iraq was to liberate the Iraqi people. Muhammed Abdul al Sudani, an Iraqi citizen said” It's a hard situation. But now that Saddam has fallen, it's OK. We can wait for the future now”. Johnathan Randall’s book After Such Knowledge, What Forgiveness? This book documents the atrocities committed against the Kurds. On March 16, a chemical attack was launched on the village of Halabji . Thousands of civilians, women and children were murdered during this attack. Quoting 'Ali Hasan al-Majid, a relative of Saddam who was in charge of Final Solution directive to kill all Kurdish men ages 15-70 “I will kill them all with chemical weapons! Who is going to say anything? The international community? # them! The international community, and those who listen to them!"”. But killing fields didn’t stop in Halabji, they encompassed all of Iraq. A report from USAID said nearly 300 mass graves containing 400,000 Iraqi civilians have been uncovered. Quoting the report” Some graves hold a few dozen bodies—their arms lashed together and the bullet holes in the backs of skulls testimony to their execution. Other graves go on for hundreds of meters, densely packed with thousands of bodies.”

Sacrifices by the US led coalition have lead to the mass graves being exposed, the weapons being removed from the hands of a genocidal maniac, the terrorists now have no place in a new Iraq and the people of Iraq are free. For the first time in decades Iraqis now vote in real non rigged elections and live without the fear of ending up in a mass grave. National Elections will be held December 16, 2006. The United States must stay the course to defeat the Islamic fascist forces, support and train Iraqi forces, and to send the right message to the terrorists and to the rest of the world. “Freedom is much sweeter” says Iraqi citizen Salim Kasim.



posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 09:54 PM
link   
Anyone there? I just put the smackdown on the anti war critics, can't i at least get a rant from liberal?



posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 10:01 PM
link   
Either the ATS membership has suddenly gone totally apathetic, or else they don't consider your stated argument worth replying to.



posted on Aug, 9 2006 @ 10:56 PM
link   
Astrobuddy,
Your right man, they gone apathetic, this is a very well researched post with multiple credible sources.



posted on Aug, 10 2006 @ 07:06 AM
link   
I will not justify your propaganda rant w/ a rant of my own. Rather I will simply state facts -

Fact: Saddam Hussein posed no nuclear threat to the United States, the original justification for the war.

Fact: Saddam Hussein did at one time have chemical weapons. We know this because OUR GOVERNMENT GAVE HIM THOSE CHEMICAL WEAPONS! It's the equivalent of a drug overlord selling you a personnal sack and then heading down to the police station to report that you were in possesion of illegal narcotics.Give me a break!

Fact: Suddam Hussein had no ties to Al Qeada - It doesn't matter how many times you repeat a lie, it doesn't make it true. He did however support the families of Palestinian homicide-bombers. The Isreali lobby A.I.P.A.C is the most powerful lobby in our government today and it doesn't take a mathematician to put two and two together on that one.

Fact: Saddam Hussein (regardless of his religious rhetoric leading up to the war) was an Arab secularist. In fact that reason alone is why the U.S. propped him up in puppet government to begin with, to stop real muslims from taking control of Iraq. Saddam feared reprisals from muslim extremists just as much as anyone in the West did.

Fact: The country is not on it's way to a successful democracy. In fact many humanitarian organizations such as Amnesty International have stated (in a 2005 report) that, HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS IN IRAQ ARE WORSE TODAY THAN UNDER SADDAM HUSSEIN. And it's gotten much worse since that report came out.

Does that register w/ you? Saddam's tyrranical occupation of Iraq ( which we not only supported but funded, like his chemical weapons) wasn't as much of a humantarian crisis as it is under our occupation.

What did the people of Iraq ever do to us? Why did we imprison them under this tyrant? Why are we improsoning them today? To save them from the man we originally imprisoned them under. So I guess by your logic we are freeing the people of Iraq from what can only be described as our Imperialism from the recent past.

I strongly recommend you read George Orwell's "1984". And take a step back, try to see the big picture instead of relying on media talking points to try to prove a case. Those talking points only work when it's a one-sided, scripted conversation.



posted on Aug, 10 2006 @ 07:34 AM
link   
I still do not understand how Iraq is supposed to have been able to "threaten the US" when it had no weapons it could deploy beyond about 300km. Maybe Israel, yes, but not the US.

As for Al-Quaeda - didn't they have a price on Husseins head?

The "500 chemical munitions" were, I believe, rusting old shells, that we so old they were considered to be inert and were deemed to be relics of the Iran/Iraq war.

Iraq - quite simply - had no active weapons of mass destruction during the invasion. How can I say that? Because they didn't use them.

And someone with Husseins record surely would have used them - after all, if he is as psychotic as he's been made out to be, then reprisals on the Iraqi people would have meant nothing to him, and even he would surely have realised that the outcome of the war was inevitable, and when he was captured he would, eventually, have been killed.

Think about it. If the US was being invaded by a superior force would it not use all the weapons at its disposal? Of course it would.



posted on Aug, 10 2006 @ 08:44 AM
link   
Iraq was a threat indeed. They were a terrorirst regime. Bill Clinton stated through his entire term how Iraq was a threat and how Evil Hussein was. I guess a lot of people have selective memories on that one though.
People also tend to overlook simple facts such as: Saddam paying palestinian terrorists $25000 for successful suicide bombings in Israel. If that's not a terrorist regime, then what is?

I generally don't like posting on the political forums here(as I already post on another message board to discuss politics, I'm here for my interest in the unexplained/paranormal, Aliens & UFO's
) but I just had to comment. People need to wake up and come together to stomp out terrorism as a whole.



posted on Aug, 10 2006 @ 02:48 PM
link   
We forgot another inconvient fact.

The US supported the regime of Saddam Hussein during the 1980's and we funded him with loads of weapons. Including chemical.

Another inconvienent fact. According to CIA reports, Iraq is not going towards a wonderful democracy, its on the brink of civil war. Which was probably the original plan anyway.



posted on Aug, 10 2006 @ 06:33 PM
link   





Fact: Suddam Hussein had no ties to Al Qeada - It doesn't matter how many times you repeat a lie, it doesn't make it true. He did however support the families of Palestinian homicide-bombers. The Isreali lobby A.I.P.A.C is the most powerful lobby in our government today and it doesn't take a mathematician to put two and two together on that one.





Wow, what a statment, Israel dosn't like its citizens getting blown to bits.


DId u read this part of my essay?
During a statement to the Nine Eleven Commission Judith S. Yaphe she said “Baghdad actively sponsored terrorist groups, providing safe haven, training, arms, and logistical support, requiring in exchange that the groups carry out operations ordered by Baghdad for Saddam's objectives, Terrorist groups were not permitted to have offices, recruitment, or training facilities or freely use territory under the regime's direct control without explicit permission from Saddam.” Judith S. Yaphe is a distinguished research professor at the National Defense University in Washington D.C.



posted on Aug, 11 2006 @ 01:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Purgatory
People need to wake up and come together to stomp out terrorism as a whole.


Q. Where was this rhetoric when the IRA was blowing up Manchester, Warrington, Birmingham, London, Belfast etc?

A. It wasn't there. In fact, sections of the US were funding it.

I didn't see any "war on terror" back then.



posted on Aug, 11 2006 @ 06:28 PM
link   
Brownpower, not once in my post did I deny that Saddam had no ties to terror. Even within your post when you quoted me, I stated that Saddam supported the families of Palestinian homicide-bombers (A terrorist tie). You asked me if I read your essay, I did and nowhere in it did I see justification to single-out Iraq in a world full of tyrants for regime change. Saddam did have one thing that others tyrants did not - Oil. This priceless resource accompanied by the fact that Saddam was a real threat to Israel (which owns Capitol Hill through A.I.P.A.C) is the real justification for war with Iraq. Sadly however, this truth will never be written into the history books. The history books will probably look a lot like your essay.

When I see such things I am often reminded of a quote by George Orwell from "1984". " He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future."

BTW: What your doing is absurd on it's face! Your trying to justify a war after the fact. And doing it after the only reasons the American people would've ever gone to war have been proven to be flat-out lies. Even worse, it seems that only way you can find a flaw in what I said is by putting words in my mouth.
Speak Truth to Power!

Take note Power - That's how you "Layeth the Smacketh Downeth"

[edit on 11/8/06 by Calm Anomoly]



posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 02:15 PM
link   
Calm man,
"The most infamous terrorist sheltered in Iraq was none other then Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, former leader of Unification and Jihad to Al Qaeda in Iraq. He personally beheaded American citizen Nicholas Berg and is credited with several other beheadings. "

To continue, this is a war on terrorism, all Islamic terrorism not just al queda.



Saddam did have one thing that others tyrants did not - Oil. This priceless resource accompanied by the fact that Saddam was a real threat to Israel (which owns Capitol Hill through A.I.P.A.C) is the real justification for war with Iraq


If the US wanted oil we could invade Saudi Arabia. Justification would be easy, most 9-11 terrorist came from their country, ect. alot easier then invading Iraq.

Second Point: U sir, said, that Saddam posed a threat to Israel. How so if he didn't have WMD? His conventional forces certainly posed no threat to Israel.

Third Point:


Sadly however, this truth will never be written into the history books. The history books will probably look a lot like your essay.


I hope the history books look like my essay. In that form the sacrifices of our armed forces and our coalition allies will not be forgotten. Or will they look like another Vietnam chapter where cowardly politicians decided the people of Iraq were expendable as long as they won their re election.



posted on Aug, 12 2006 @ 07:26 PM
link   
What you got in the opening post is nothing more than the well written account of what was the plan of offensive to invade Iraq and the desirable results.

Any smart person today knows that you are missing the facts of how ill planned and executed was the whole campaign and the disastrous results that we all Americans will have to live and endure for generations to come.

You just took what you wanted and left what you didn't like that is why nobody will lke to add anything to it, because is plenty of threads with the real issues at hand.

Have fun with it.


BTW US doesn't need to invade Saudi because they are willing partners.

Iraq and Iran oil reserves rival the one in Saudi and they were in danger of falling in China's and Russian hands now Iraq oil will stay in US hands while they are still working on Iran.



posted on Aug, 18 2006 @ 05:59 AM
link   
I could go down the list and discredit your case point for point like I already did, and then you could post another reply that doesn't account for all the holes in your logic, and fails to see the big picture, but I won't. I honestly don't know what I was thinking, attempting to have an actual debate w/ an amatuer disinfo-agent
. When I reread this entire thread another great quote came to mind,

"A wise man once said, do not argue with fools, because people from a distance can't tell who is who".

That wise man was non other than Jay-Z
. Seriously though, Power I wish you all the best at your future job at the Ministry of Truth.



[edit on 18/8/06 by Calm Anomoly]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join