What was the main reason that Americans supported the Iraqi war?
- Thread starter Syringer
- Start date
I voted 9/11 - because I believe that this led to an over-riding bordering-on-insanely-paranoid fear perpetuating the government, media and public. I believe the Iraq war to have been the extension of that fear (possibly with some political motives also). Some will say we are right to hold the level of paranoia we currently do. I'm not so sure.
Cheers,
Andy
Cheers,
Andy
I opposed the war from day one. I voted "People believing Iraq was a strong threat and had WMD's" because that is the reason Bush and Co. gave for the invasion and it's also the reason they can't prove now.
Which means it was all a lie.
In that case ignorance is the most accurate answer. I just don't want to let Bush off the hook for this crime.
Which means it was all a lie.
In that case ignorance is the most accurate answer. I just don't want to let Bush off the hook for this crime.
Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,268
- 126
Says it all for me too. Without 9/11 it would have been business as usual. No "Axis of Evil" WMD's would be an unknown phrase, tensions around the world would be lower.
I disagree. Saddam was going to be dealt with. It was discussed on 9/12/01 whether or not Iraq should be attacked. Bush vetoed the idea but it does give you an idea about their mindset. I did not then, nor do I now, believe war was the first/only option but I do believe that Iraq/Saddam was going to be an issue that this admin. pursued to an end by whatever means they deemed necessary.
Hayabusa Rider
Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
- Jan 26, 2000
- 50,879
- 4,268
- 126
Thing is UQ, that this topic would most likely not have been thought of on 9/12. It became a considered option (albeit disregarded at that moment) only after 9/11. I think 9/11 was a trigger point that created the option for war. What I believe that Bush would have had a hard time convincing a US who believed itself invulnerable to a terrorist attack, at least the size of the WTC. Imagine Bush coming before the public, unable to use existing fear. I think most people would have been like WTF? Going from interceeding in Iraq (which may have happened eventually in some form) to a shooting war would have been a big step. Not so after the WTC. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe you felt that initally this was sabre rattling, at least it seemed to be, so there was disbelief among many when the possibility of war was being discussed.
And that is due to the neocon takeover of this administration. Cheney, Wolfowitz, Perle, and Kristol have been demanding the US invade Iraq since the 1991 Gulf war ended. Now they have Bush to lead around by the nose. They saw their opportunity with a weak mind in power and took it.
After all, the guy never left the USA until after he entered the White House. His foreign policy skills consist of Condoleeza Rice and a few flash cards. Now they have him in way over his head. I wonder who'll resign next?
Yes, I did think it was sabre rattling and I was right, up until the time the war started.
However I still think Iraq was an issue coming in for this admin. and I think Bush would have went to the UN to try and turn up the heat on the issue. The much maligned PNAC docs. give us an insight into what the feelings are of many in this admin. wrt Iraq. They felt Saddam was the destabilizing element in the region, that he neede to go and we had to ensure that we were in a position to maintain stability in the region. Whether or not they could have convinced the American people or anyone at the UN is something we can only speculate on as well but I am convinced he would have pushed very hard.Maybe Americans, like Bush, are just waiting for the dust to settle, then they can decide what the best reason for starting the war was. Start war first on a proxy BS reason, substitute real justification later.
Much of it is near-blind trust in government, especially in the executive. We still, deep down, want to believe they always act in accordance to some morality and work tirelessly toward a better America. Truth is morality takes a back seat to opportunity and congress takes a lot of breaks, speaking of which....
I still maintain congress failed us in the sense they didn't formally declare war and opted out of their responsibility to do so using that resolution trick. The debate would have been much richer had they not failed in their constitutional obligations. We would have had things revealed to us that Bush Inc. dare not speak of such as the terrible financial burden a perpetual presence in Iraq will cost us. Alas, it didn't happen and when we get those future credit card bills we'll be quite shocked.
glenn1
Lifer
- Sep 6, 2000
- 25,383
- 1,013
- 126
IMHO, 9/11 was the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back. All the other issues were present before, but not top of mind enough that the war would have received the overwhelming level of support that it did otherwise. In other words, absent 9/11, invading Iraq could have still happened, but would have required another precipitating cause to reach the tipping point where the majority supported the war to the level they did.
Why does there have to be one "main" reason?
The cumulative effect of at least four of your choices was good enough.
The cumulative effect of at least four of your choices was good enough.
JellyBaby, if those were your reasons, so be it. They weren't mine, nor do I have the hubris to speak for the majority of the American people.
The majority of Americans didn't speak at all, at least not via their representatives in congress who bailed out on officially voting on declaring war. I know, a resolution was "good enough". No, it wasn't. What's the point in having a constitution if you can ignore it whenever you feel like it?
Oh and I picked those 4 to counter your claim that any 4 on that list were good enough, not because I particularly felt those were the reasons.
Well overall its ignorance, but ignorant to the fact that this administration has lied about WMD and the 9/11 connection that doesn't exist.
It was this administration's fear-mongering over 9/11, no question about it. Connecting it to Saddam was the most untrue thing to come out of Bush's mouth, but people were scared enough to put fact aside and believe him.
LunarRay
Diamond Member
- Mar 2, 2003
- 9,993
- 1
- 76
Iraq is but a puzzle piece in a vision that is defined as a philosophy. Know the philosophy and know the part each must play to develope its part of the vision's image. The agenda of this administration is simply to bring to reality the philosophy.
With or without 9/11 the philosophy existed. With or without OBL the philosophy existed. These are the enablers that provided the means toward the end. If, for example, an African nation had most all the same conditions as Iraq do you expect the same response? I don't.
There exists one constant through out our history and that is office seekers tend to be the vehicles used by much more powerfull life forms that secret themselves in back rooms and penthouse suits contemplating the best use of their power. This is not a bad thing... to contemplate, but, to enact those schemes elevates these individuals to god like status and that is inherently bad. Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan and on down the line are but vehicles. The conduit through which our lives are decided.
Know the philosophy and you are among the elite pulling the strings. You have no face, no identity just power. This is, I believe, what did Kennedy in and every one else who was a danger to the grand scheme. Who has the power? They are those with the money... not just here but from through out the world...
When we blame Bush for this or that... we are focused on the bit player (allbeit the biggest) but, if he goes down another pops up to take his place... the Philosophy... look for what it is by trying to piece together the facts not the spun ones but the naked ones. The facts are the pieces that provide insight into what may be the future for us all.
With or without 9/11 the philosophy existed. With or without OBL the philosophy existed. These are the enablers that provided the means toward the end. If, for example, an African nation had most all the same conditions as Iraq do you expect the same response? I don't.
There exists one constant through out our history and that is office seekers tend to be the vehicles used by much more powerfull life forms that secret themselves in back rooms and penthouse suits contemplating the best use of their power. This is not a bad thing... to contemplate, but, to enact those schemes elevates these individuals to god like status and that is inherently bad. Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan and on down the line are but vehicles. The conduit through which our lives are decided.
Know the philosophy and you are among the elite pulling the strings. You have no face, no identity just power. This is, I believe, what did Kennedy in and every one else who was a danger to the grand scheme. Who has the power? They are those with the money... not just here but from through out the world...
When we blame Bush for this or that... we are focused on the bit player (allbeit the biggest) but, if he goes down another pops up to take his place... the Philosophy... look for what it is by trying to piece together the facts not the spun ones but the naked ones. The facts are the pieces that provide insight into what may be the future for us all.
Most Americans are stupid. They can't tell the difference between Osama and Saddam. This is a country where people bought rocks as pets.
Everybody was killed in childhood, destroyed by words and hate. That fear, the feeling of being worthless got buried deep deep deep. Every person is a raging psychotic when those memories threaten to surface. Because of them we can't afford to feel. Because we are terrified of our inner reality we seek release, a sense of aliveness in ways that take us close. We long to re-experience our terror because then we were alive, but we can't do it through memory so we do it proximately in life. We are like moths drawn to the flame of feeling, of terror hate and war. In life we are the walking wounded, the living dead. But in war and terror we come alive again. This is how we will go extinct. We need to die to know. But we would rather act it out than remember. It's why we create the bomb and germ. Humanity has the choice to wake up or to die.
It's simple really ! Make a Fox news poll and use the right wording in the poll to confuse people. Maybe you add some spin on top of it and add a touch of scare tactics and bam ! You have unconditional support from the public on whatever you are looking to push.
I did not say "any" four, I said four of them.
There were polls taken before the war. Every one that I saw indicated that a majority did support the war. You don't protest what you support.
You'll have to educate me more on the resolution vs. Congress authorizing the actions taken. Didn't both houses of Congress pass a bill authorizing Pres. Bush to take action in Iraq? Why was that not sufficient?
Congress acted on information provided by Bush and Co. which it now turns out was all completely fabricated.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter