.jpg)
What's Crack'n Peoples!
This has been a long war and it has cost us some serious casualties on and off the battlefield. Let's look at what's happened since the war. Did we even have a valid reason? Don't take my words for it lets check the facts:
The Real Reasons Why We We're In Iraq
|
by Harley Sorensen
|
|
We should get out of Iraq immediately. Let me explain ... But,
first, bear in mind why we're in Iraq. It has nothing to do with
weapons of mass destruction, and it has nothing to do with the brutal
dictatorship of Saddam Hussein. It has a lot to do with ambition. Before we invaded Iraq, our politicians told us that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction in great quantities. Secretary of State Colin Powell even went to the United Nations and described Iraq's cache in detail, down to the pound of certain weapons. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld told us that not only did Iraq have these weapons but he knew exactly where they were. This is why I seriously doubted that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. What our government told us defied logic and common sense. The United Nations had inspectors in Iraq looking for weapons. They couldn't find any. Logic and common sense, then, would have dictated that our government tell those inspectors where to look. After all, if we knew, why wouldn't we share our knowledge with the inspectors? We wouldn't, of course, because we didn't know. Our government explained its unwillingness to help by explaining that it didn't want to compromise confidential sources. How much sense does that make? Saddam has enough weaponry to attack the western world, and we can't lead the UN inspectors to it because we don't want Saddam to know how we got the information? Give me a break! (As a footnote, it should be noted that a favorite trick of pathological liars is to "protect" their nonexistent sources of information.) We now know for certain that Saddam did not have the weapons we used to go to war against Iraq. And common sense tells that we didn't attack Iraq because Saddam is a brutal dictator. He was a brutal dictator back in the days when we played footsie with him as he fought Iran. (Do a Google image search for Rumsfeld and Saddam, and you'll find pictures of Rummy and Saddam shaking hands.) Historically, the United States has always been friendly with brutal dictators if it's to our financial advantage. Currently, there are other dictators afoot; Saddam wasn't the only one. And anyone who can read knows that Saddam had nothing whatsoever to do with the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. So why did we go to war with Iraq?......The short answer is "oil." But that's not the whole story. Briefly, we went to war with Iraq because an influential group of conservatives (now known as "neo-cons") convinced President George W. Bush (Who also had his own intentions with "The Family Business In Mind") that it was in America's best interests to conquer Iraq as a first step toward dominating the oil-producing nations in the Middle East and eventually the world. Not insignificantly, these same neo-cons wanted to eliminate Iraq as a threat to their darling ally, Israel. Their plan is laid out in detail on the Web at www.newamericancentury.org (Read More) |
THE TRUE COST OF THIS WAR -
No comments:
Post a Comment