A lot of people do not agree with the Invasion of Iraq, but what if we left Saddam continue what he was doing. Mass murders, torture, rape, abductions, deportations, forced disappearances and assassinations were some of the tricks he used to keep control in Iraq. It has been said that he could have been responsible for between 1 million and 5 million deaths. A common perception of why the Invasion took place was for oil. Yet Saudi Arabia, Canada, Venezuela and Iran have more oil reserves. Why were they not attacked? But should we have let Hussein's murderous rampage continue?
Well quite a few people on here think the Iraq invasion was wrong. But if it didn't happen then Saddam could still possibly be in power killing millions more people.
A couple of million people marched throughout the country opposing it as well. Still,on a more serious note, how hairy is that arse ST posted?
'A couple of million people marched throughout the country opposing it as well.' To be fair, they marched from Hyde Park to Parliament Square didn't they ? About 800 yards, had they been asked to march any further the chances are no-one would have bothered
The Iraq war had little to do with oil or WMD What the Americans wanted was to replace Middle Eastern regimes that promoted hatred of the West (seen as a reason for 9-11) with pro-West regimes. Of course they could not go after nominal allies like Egypt, Jordan or Saudi Arabia. So that left Libya, Syria and Iraq. Iraq was the easiest to justify.
As all anti war protesters believe Bush is stupid....then surely he was too dumb to go to war for any other reason than "ill get him for ye, paw"
http://www.not606.com/showthread.php/85818-wkd-appreciation-thread "those who love WKD Blue or any flavours post your thoughts here"
