Reasons for war in Iraq: Not just WMDs

We keep hearing this constant droaning from the left that Bush was wrong to go to war with Iraq because we did not find WMDs.  Despite the fact that we have found WMDs.  But that does not matter, the left is not interested in truth, they are only interested in destroying Bush.

Be that as it may, I decided to go look up the resolution authorizing war in Iraq.  What does that resolution say were the reasons for going to war.  You can read the resolution here

A summary of the reasons are…

  1. "direct and flagrant violation of the cease-fire"
  2. "Iraq had an advanced nuclear weapons development program that was much closer to producing a nuclear weapon than intelligence reporting had previously indicated"
  3. Iraq was in "material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations"
  4. "continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations; "
  5. "continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman"
  6. "has demonstrated its capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people"
  7. "continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces "
  8. "members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States"
  9. "Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of American citizens"
  10. Involvment in the 9/11 attack
  11. Willingness to attack the United States and it’s allies.
  12. Enforcement of Nations Security Council Resolution 660.
  13. To Liberate Iraqs 50 million civilians.
  14. End support for international terrorists.

I know this is not exactly a summary, but you get the idea.  Don’t be deluded into thinking that we went to war with Iraq for one reason only.

waynem

About waynem

As a Minnesota based photographer and artist I have been greatly influenced by the Upper Midwest. I focus my skills and energies on portraits, landscapes, cityscapes, architectural and fine art work. My best work comes from images first painted in my mind. I mull over a prospective image for weeks or months, seeing it from different angles and perspectives, then finally deciding what to capture. The result is images that deeply touch people's emotions and powerfully evoke memories and dreams. My images are used commercially by companies and organizations ranging from Financial Services firms, mom and pop Ice Cream shops and The Basilica of St Mary to communicate their shared vision and values. Book and magazine publishers have featured my images on their covers. My photographs also grace and enhance the decor of many fine homes.
This entry was posted in Current Affairs, Politics and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Reasons for war in Iraq: Not just WMDs

  1. notArighty says:

    1. “members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States”
    2. “Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of American citizens”
    3. Involvment in the 9/11 attack
    3 BIG lies.

  2. Wayne M says:

    Tell your liberal leadership that…

  3. notARighty says:

    You have blinders on.
    Less than 6 senators and fewer than a dozen house members read anything other than the ‘executive summary’ portion of the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq sent to them by the executive branch (which is in charge, duh, of the CIA, the FBI, etc). The Estimate was a revised version/compendium of documents within the executive branch. These earlier documents had fuller details towards the validity of the intelligence assets that were the actual sources of the intelligence. That is, in those documents, it was determined that the sources of info were suspect. (And since then, the sources have been shown to be complete shams.) But in the resulting NIE document these pieces of information were lost or simply relegated to footnotes. Now why would they do that?
    The CIA at the time was reeling from taking the blame for 9/11. That combined with preasure from Cheney and the Pentagon (Rumsfield, Wolfowitz and their new organization in the pentagon that directly threatened the CIA), and you have a recipe for applying preassure against an organization.
    Members of Congress received this document just days before they were to vote on it.
    How could the liberals have said anything different based on what was given to them by the Republican-controlled Congress and the Republican-controlled White House? To now come back and say the liberals are at fault just as much as anyone else is in error. When they were the minority in the government? That is just plain ignorant.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Spam protection by WP Captcha-Free