Why do democrats think the reason we invaded Iraq was because Iraq attacked us on 9/11?
============= Just look at the number of questions and answers that the liberals think we should be fighting in Afghanistan instead of Iraq because they are the ones who attacked us and not Iraq. They still seem to think that we went into Iraq to get those who attacked us and we have failed. I don't get it. I don't know who convinced them it was anything other than WMD. I remember the lead up... Iraq kicked our inspectors out and everyone was worried what he was doing. Not because we thought he took part of the attack on 9/11. It was never that way, but it seems that the Democrats don't listen to the news and are all now convinced Saddam had a hand in our attacks. And worse yet, they think by attacking Afghanistan they are fighting those who attacked us on 9/11. They are really, really, lost, in my opinion.
Why did the US invade Iraq during the Gulf War?
I remember it was something to do with Saddam killing hundreds of thousands of people because those people were manipulating the oil prices in the region. He claimed that they were historically part of Iraq. But I can't remember for the life of me why the US intervened. They said it was about oil but it wasn't like the US secretly pumped oil into their ships and bailed. Why did they invade Iraq?
Why do conservatives get so pumped up about getting into wars despite wars ending many lives?
First up: Liberals are not anti-war (or as anti-war as people think). Liberals sided with conservatives throughout Vietnam and didn’t turn against the war until after the 1968 Tet offensive. More recently, Liberals didn’t really start standing up against the war in Iraq until it turned into the quagmire that some in the party had predicted from the start. The GOP backed Iraq, just as they’d backed the Persian Gulf war 20 years before. It resulted in the largest US anti-war rallies since Vietnam in 2003 and 2004. But liberal support for the anti-war movement tailed off drastically once Obama took office in 2009, and it was a very small segment of the Anti-War left that protested against the Drone attacks and our proxy wars in Libya and Syria. Hillary’s supporters in the DNC had no problem with her laughter over killing Qaddafi—”we came, we saw, he died”—even after Qaddafi had agreed to all US demands and even though Libya has now fallen into the hands of ISIS.Trump was initially thought to be anti-war—he was against confrontations over Syria and Russia. But he seems to have fallen in line with the Deep state over the wars we’re going to enter or foment in the future.There are principled anti-war conservatives (Ron and Rand Paul come to mind). GOP enthusiasm for war seems to be about the fat weapons contracts that result. But remember that the Ohio Congressional caucus (mostly Democrats) forced the Pentagon to purchase the C27 J transport, a plane which was literally flown from the assembly line to the boneyard in Arizona.The Neocons (represented by the Project for a New American Century) are in fact conservatives and pro-war. But they’re very involved in policy issues beyond simple war and peace. And the neocons have been a presence in Washington since the days of Iran Contra. And their wartime goals haven’t changed much—they’ve wanted to force ‘regime change from Iran all the way to Yemen as a way to protect American client states including Saudi Arabia and Israel.
Why do tanks fail during military parades in Russia?
The Russians love to show off their new toys in parades but because they hype them up without fully testing and developing them we often see these embarrassing breakdowns.It is generally accepted that Russia is at least two decades behind the west in all areas of military technology and developments. The T15 breakdowns in Red Square would suggest they are even further behind with AFV drive chain development. A tank that needs towing off a flat paved parade route speaks more about its actual performance than all the propaganda and hype.This is nothing new, T54, T64, T74, T80, T90, etc, were all heralded as world beaters but a visit to the scrap yards around battlefields of the last 50 years tell a different story. Russia appears to be moving to a quality over quantity concept but does not have the money or know how to attain this. Economic forecasts suggest Russia will never be able to build more than a couple of hundred T15’s so, even if they work, they are not going to shift the balance of power.All, including the Russians, need to remember, that the Red Army has not faced a technically superior, better trained, battle hardened, more experienced or supplied enemy since 1941, and we all know how that turned out until mother nature came to their aid.
Why don't we just invade north Korea already?
I know everyone's just going to say you're American aren't you? and yes I am and proud and lucky to be part of one of the more upstanding countries in this cruel world. We take a look at North Korea and we understand it's militarized and all the crops and food that are imported are used to feed the massive army they have while children starve on the side of the street and still "private citizens" are forced into concentration camps where they dig wheat out of frozen dirt and when they give up they are shot. In a country as horrible and aggressive towards the rest of the world why would we wait any longer for them to maybe be capable of becoming nuclear? If China and Russia would actually help for once and be part of the defense council of the UN that they were so honorably granted maybe it wouldn't be so taxing on my nation. I'm sorry this is aggressive because I love all people but the hate I see coming from North Korea is inhuman.
Is it true that the Syrian rebels framed Assad for chemical weapon attacks?
Assad did not use Chemical weapons throughout the war. You may think in 2013 that he did because that's what all western media was reporting about. However, if you think of it objectively, you’ll realise that no sane person in the government would carry out such an attack. The government invited the UN inspectors to check the Syrian chemical stockpiles and on the same day we are told to believe that the Syrian government decided for the first time during the war to use chemical weapons 9km away from where the inspectors were. Baring in mind that the government was making gains and on the offensive. So clearly it doesn't add up, there’s a reason behind every move and the reason behind that one was to give the west a good enough excuse to bomb Syria back to the Stone Age. Just like they did in Libya.Now, when it comes to what happened yesterday, the west quickly pointed fingers at the government as always. Digging deeper into the case, you’ll find that Russian Air Force did not carry out any air strikes in Idlib that day. However, the Syrian Air Force did target a weapons depot and a factory used to produce weapons. Now when all the hype about a chemical weapons attack came to light, roper were able to join the dots together… the government hit a weapons depot where chemical weapons were stored. The same chemical weapons that were used against the civilians in government controlled in Aleppo in late 2016 but hardly reported in the West.In addition, there has been multiple statements made by the Iraqi as well as the United Nations regarding the use of Chemical weapons by jihadists in Iraq against Iraqi forces and civilians. This begs the question, were those terrorists getting their chemical weapons from this factory in Idlib? And the answer is Yes they were.In conclusion, the government did not attack Idlib with chemical weapons that would be the most irrational illogical thing to do. Instead they attacked a weapons depot that stored and manufactured chemical weapons for the terrorists to use on civilians. The terrorists were quick to point the blame on Assad in order to get the west to attack Syria and turn the tide of the war in their favour again.
Does anyone think it's okay the west hasn't at least threatened military action on Russia?
I'm a news junky and read the paper everyday. As well, I follow CNN and I haven't heard any talk of the possibility of military intervention regarding the Ukraine crisis, not to mention what Russia did in Crimea. Like wtf, should the fact Russia is neclear armed really be that scary to the west and the rest of the world? Putin's over confident! Sure Russia has military might, but the USA has more than double Russia's population and an even more vaunted military than Russia. And the USA has some powerful allies as well.