Originally Posted by Tranic335i
This was written by a 15 year old on livescience.com responding to a conspiracy theorist.
If they wanted to justify a war in the middle east, they didn't need to pull off 9/11 to do it; hell, our government's been meddling in Middle Eastern affairs for decades without having to kill its own citizens to justify it, including one case where the CIA, on the orders of President Dwight D. Eisenhower, paid mobs in Iran to overthrow the democratically elected leader and replace him with a bloodthirsty dictator, which is the root cause of most of our problems with Iran today.
Bush could have just pointed out that Hussein was a rampant psychopath who murdered thousands of his own citizens for nothing other than being Kurds, who stole oil from and occupied Kuwait, and who threatened to attack Israel, one of our closest allies, and many people here probably would have gone along with it. I'd even consider it a rather strong case, even if I would still oppose our involvement on the grounds that Israel would be able to handle the situation on it's own if Western nations and China would simply butt out of it's affairs and let it protect itself, and if we stopped giving more aid to Israel's enemies than we give to it.
Not to mention, the war for oil you're referring to is taking place in Iraq, whereas in our search for Bin Laden, we put troops in Afghanistan and Pakistan. There is hardly any, if any, correlation at all.
That would not have worked, to simply say "Oh Saddam is suddenly bad now lets get him". He was in power for years so the US could not just go in. They had to fabricate something to give it legitmacy, like WMDs. Iraq was a much more peaceful place than it was before than it is now.
America has long been a supporter of placing dictators that are on their payroll throughout the world. Gaddaffi a classic example. Afghan president another. Pakistan president another. THIS IS THEIR STRATEGY.