How many Americans still think Iraq or Saddam was involved in the 9-11 attack?
The majority of the left did not believe that Iraq was involved, of that I remember. However, note that the left (Democratic constituency) is typically smaller than the Right. A poll in 2003 reported that 70 percent of Americans thought Saddam was in fact, link to 9/11. Over time that poll has reversed but the lies spread by the Bush administration took deep roots. Another poll by CNN showed that 38 percent of Americans STILL believed that Saddam clearly supported Osama bin Laden. Another 31 percent said they felt Saddam at least assisted. So even at this poll in 2011, 69 percent still thought Saddam was still.some how connected, though roughly half began to feel that connection was less. This is inspite of 76 percent of Americans in that same 2011 poll thst said the Iraq war was a mistake.With the releas of the final 28 pages of the 911 report, the evidence is clear that it was Saudi Arabia and Bandar (sometimes called Bandar Bush because of his close ties.with the Bush's) that was the source, not Saddam or Iraq. Yet this revelation, very much implies that our government is truly corrupt to it's core, is such a shocking truth that many will STILL believe the opposite.There's an old saying, 'tell a lie long.enough, and enough times, eventually.... everyone will believe it'.
Did you believe Iraq, and Saddam Hussein, were going to attack the United States with weapons of mass destrution?
Never, this was a move to defend Israel, Bush was a born again christian, serving Israel was a religious commitment, AIPAC was all over capitol hill in the days leading up to the Iraq invasion, Cheney stood to make a lot of money so he was on board. The military is a business, it makes business for itself.Bush was spoiling for an Iraq war well before 9–11. he discussed it with Tony Blair.I am not suggesting any type of conspiracy, I just think the Bush administration had a vested interest in ignoring intelligence about a terrorist attack. After 9–11 Bush found excuses to do what he wanted to do all along.Saddam Hussein was never any threat to the USA.Had Bush 1 used decent diplomacy, the first war with iRAQ would have never taken place.We ended up with an unholy alliance of Israel, AIPAC, Cheney and arms dealers and the military money machine, and post 9–11 paranoia all pushing war.The whole thing sounded a lot like Johnson and the gulf of Tonkin deal to me.At the time i was in a survival struggle where I worked or I would have taken time off to go protest in Washington DC.
Why do some people believe that George W. Bush was responsible for the 9/11 attacks?
There are many factors as to why people feel Bush was involved or complicit..1) He had prior warning that read “Osama bin Laden commited to using airliners to attack skyscrapers” in Aug on 20012) All but two jet fighters were unavailible to intercept any of the four hijacked planes. The two that were avaiible were sent out over the ocean during the attack.3) At the time of the attack, national defense was doing a training on what to do if we were attacked by terrorist , which confused the military.4)Bush used the attack to settle a personal score with Saddam Hussien, which he had decided to do BEFORE the attack.5) Bush grounded all planes except the one that he used to fly all Bin Ladens out of the country.6) The website “project for a new American century” posted a letter saying it was neccisary to have an attack on America similar to Pearl Harbor to spark an attack on the mideast. The letter was signed by members of the Bush (Paul wolfowitz, Dick Cheney, and many more) administration in addition to Jeb Bush.7) George Bush’s brother Neal Bush was in charge of the company that oversaw security at both WTC towers.8) The Patriot Act was passed within days of the attack. Showing it was already written and waiting for an event to scare the American population into accepting it.9) He allowed Osama Bin Laden escape at Tora Bora (ensuring the war would continue)These are just some of the resaons that rational people have to question the validity of the official conspiracy theory proposed by the government.Bush may or may not have been involved, but what is clear is that many of the conspiracy theories seem more plausible than the goverments story.
Should Congress have been more active when the decision was made to go to war with Iraq?
Congress should always be active in the decision to enter any war. We have lost a lot of citizens in many military actions without a declaration of war being issued. Are our politicians even remotely trying to recognize and obey constitutional law?
Many say Bush 43 lied about WMDs in Iraq. Is it possible that Saddam Hussein thought he did have them? But was scammed with the WMD equivalents of oregano and baking soda? Maybe fearful aides never told him and he kept bluffing out of fear of Iran?
First of all, quite clearly Iraq had WMD in the past and used them both against Iran and against Iraqis.After the first Gulf War, the peace agreement was for Saddam to rid Iraq of WMD. The US created an organization to oversee the destruction of Iraq’s WMD. During the first several years, great progress was made, however, every declaration of what WMD Iraq has was proven false. Around 1995 progress ceased because according to Iraqi declarations it had WMD that Iraq had not turned over for destruction.Based on what we know now, Iraqi WMD had been eliminated by 1995, however, Saddam believed that Iraq would be vulnerable to invasion by Iran if Iran knew Iraq had no WMD. Saddam played a dangerous game of claiming he had no WMD while behaving like he still had it. In 1998 the situation became serious enough that the UN weapons inspectors were pulled out of Iraq and a series of airstrikes were carried out at suspected WMD sites. Inspectors went back in, found the same stonewalling from Iraq they experienced before and then Saddam ordered all inspectors out of Iraq. Another series of airstrikes were carried out after which Saddam refused to allow weapons inspectors back in Iraq.The situation stalemated at that point until Bush was elected in 2000. Iraq was near the top of the list of “unfinished business” from the Clinton Administration. After 9/11 the toleration for Iraqi intransigence was gone. Bush gave Iraq as stern warning that he needed to cooperate with Weapons Inspectors. Saddam relented, but, the long history of Saddam’s deceptions to the UN and to his own top personnel convinced the Bush Administration Saddam was just lying again and the US and Britain invaded.There is only one person who is responsible for the deceptions that led to the Iraq war - Saddam Hussein.
Did the Bush government actually engineered the Iraq War even before the events of 9/11?
The final phase for regime change was put in place during the second Clinton administration. It was bilaterally supported—because you can always get the Repugnicans and Demoncraps to agree on destroying other countries. The main issue in the warwhore US establishment was (1) major PGW-style force, (2) PGW-style force done LITE, and (3) another version of Bay of Goats (proxy forces, US air forces, US special forces, but no huge troop deployments). It’s interesting to note that as for option (3), that was largely negated in 2001 because those assets went to a Bay of Goats type operation to take Afghanistan. They just switched proxy forces and locations from Iraq to Afghanistan. With that largely expended, the main controversy then became huge force or smaller force. The warwhore war criminal regime of Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Rice opted for something in between.