Why Did the US Invade Iraq in 2003?

Answer divided into motive, opportunity, and situation.Motive:- The US was still at war with Iraq. No peace treaty had been been signed since the end of the first Gulf War, and there were periodic hostilities as the US enforced the no fly zones and Saddam tested them by lighting up anti-aircraft radars.

- There were indications that Saddam had continued his attempt to build nuclear weapons, like stonewalling and hiding things from the UN weapons inspectors. It turned out that these weapons programs had been abandoned around 1991 (Iraq Survey Group Final Report.) There's speculation that Iraq intended to create an impression on Iran and other regional actors, that they had continued with these programs.

- Saudi had hosted large numbers of US troops since the end of the first Gulf War, and this was considered destabilizing. The fact that the 9/11 hijackers were mostly Saudis was considered an indication of how much the US presence destabilized Saudi Arabia. But as long as Iraq was a serious threat, neither side was willing to let the Americans leave.

- I'm pretty sure "getting our hands on Iraqi oil" was not a motive, but concern about Iraq becoming a regional threat that influenced Kuwaiti and Saudi oil decisions was an important consideration.- There were people in the administration who had urged Bush senior to continue the first war. A key part of their ideology was that democracies don't go to war against each other, so promoting democracy was a way of making the US safer.

Their position was strengthened by Saddam's massacre of Kurds and genocide against Shi'a "southern Arabs" after that war, and by the ongoing cost of maintaining the no fly one.Opportunity:- 9/11 put the US on a war footing, and raised the level of anxiety both in the public and on both sides of the aisle, making it much easier to go to war.- Post 9/11, there was considerable international sympathy and support for the US, so even though most countries were opposed to the Iraq war, there was less opposition than would otherwise been the case.

- The dissolution of the Soviet Union and the nadir of Russian power at the time (and also the low point in Chinese power, still just a few years after 1989) made it much easier for the US to assert power internationally at that moment.Situational (mis)understanding:After the CIA failed so miserably in predicting and preventing 9/11, Cheney stopped trusting them, and ordered that raw intelligence come directly to the VPs office. Without the professional level of assessing and curating intelligence, and since they were expecting the worst, they were subject to considerable confirmation bias.

There was plenty to see, it was hard to assess, they were afraid of missing anything, and they expected to see Iraq doing something nefarious.Cheney believed that whether or not Saddam and Al Qaida were working together, in tandem they created a huge threat to the US. His nightmare was a state-power entity that could build a nuclear bomb, that could potentially coordinate with a terrorist organization that couldn't be stopped by conventional nuclear deterrence.

The neocons in and out of government, like Wolfowitz and Kristol, analogized from the rapid fall of the Soviet Union and it's satellite regimes, and believed that if Saddam and the oppressive Baathist structures were removed by an invasion, Iraq would self-organize as a democracy - the Iraqi people were educated, secular, and rich. Without the dictator they would choose democracy and have the means to implement it

· Related Questions

If you're a woman, how does it feel when a man opens a door for you? Is it a compliment or sexism?

And if a man, why do you open doors for women?

If a man chooses to treat me like a lady, I bask in the glow of his respect. Just as if he helps me on with my coat and pulls my chair out for me or gives me his coat if Im chilly.

We in the United States in particular have gone off at such a ridiculous angle with our nearly militant need for womens equality. I do believe in sexual equality, but equality does not mean sameness. Men and women are not the same, we are different right out of the starting gate.

Anyone who does not believe that never visited my sisters house when she had three boys under the age of 5, all of whom were able to walk, run, talk, scream, and throw things across the room. Or talked to a preschool or kindergarten teacher.If men and woman are the same, why are sporting contests sexually segregated?

Look at the times and you will know. Its may be sexist to say men are generally stronger than women, but it is also true. Men are hardwired to want to provide for and take care of their women and their families.

They hold the door for a woman not because they think she needs him to, but because they want to. They are showing respect for her.This was really driven home to me on winter break senior year when I was traveling with two guys (no horror stories, they were wonderful) coming home from the Florida keys.

They knew I had gotten myself down there in the height of the season ( I didnt say I was smart), spent my first night on a sofa in a hotel lobby, and the next day, gotten myself a job for the week, a place to live, and a way to get my scuba certification.They knew I did not need them to take care of me. They knew I was fine on my own.

But still, when the heavens opened up at 2am and everyone in the campgrounds ran for the limited shelter that was available and tried to figure out their next move, they gave me the keys to the car so I would be sheltered and safe so (with a smile) we wont have to worry about you. Men do things like that for women not because they think we need them to. They do them because a gentleman always wants to treat a woman like a lady.

They give us compliments for the same reason. If you do not let them do these things, its like slapping them in the face. And if you dont like when they do them for you, then you are missing a wonderful part of being a woman.

So, chill.Oh, and I will hold the door for anyone who is near it as I enter or exit. Courtesy.

One more thing. Back in the days when you could only unlock one car door at a time, when the guy unlocked my door first, I would then immediately reach over to unlock his. If he didnt unlock my door first, I would not go out with him again.

And I knew a guy who, if the women didnt reach over and unlock his door for him, would not go out with her again. He didnt care if he got it unlocked before she managed to do it (I often couldnt find the lock in time), but she had to at least try. I really respected him for that

------

Has Donald Trump made the divide between left and right worse?

The terms u201cLeftu201d and u201cRightu201d first came into use during the French Revolution of 1789 when members of the National Assembly divided into supporters of the king to the president's right and supporters of the revolution to his left. The rallying cry of the French Revolution was Libertu00e9, u00e9galitu00e9, fraternitu00e9 (liberty, equality, fraternity) a phrase that encapsulates the principles espoused by those opposed to authoritarian rule and massive wealth inequality.Trump may not consciously intend to polarize these two groups within the American population, but his promotion of right leaning policies and authoritarian power dynamics has prompted a balancing response from the left.

This could be seen as an immune response from the body politic, devised and created by the founding fathers to guard against a return to dictatorship. America, like France, is the child of revolution. Within six years of Americau2019s rejecting the British crown the people of France embarked on their own revolution against the monarchy.

The brotherly connection between the two countries being celebrated in the 1886 dedication of the Statue of Liberty, a gift to the USA from the Government of France.How things have changed in recent years! Trump believes it is his God given right (as the u201cchosen oneu201d) to rule by fiat from the White House.

He also enacts economic policies that increase the bottom line of his corpulent cronies and take from the needy even the crumbs that fall from the masteru2019s table. His tax cut for the rich, for example, has done nothing but increase wealth inequality yet he continues to siphon funds from social programs, designed to support those in need, and wastes them countering an imaginary u201cMexican Invasionu201d.He longs to destroy the New World Order created by his political adversaries (as illustrated in the image), but goes way beyond that by effectively declaring war on the foundation principles of America itself.

Politically speaking what is America other than the corporate manifestation of constitutional precept? And yet he thumbs his nose at the constitution, the law and the judiciary. His rallying cry is u201cMake America Great Againu201d when what he is actually doing, by unraveling 243 years of progress, is making America 18th Century England again.

By repeatedly trashing the two term limit of the 22nd amendment and by continually obstructing the constitutional responsibilities of congress, he has become the very person the constitution was formulated to confront and is, as such, its enemy. Americau2019s foundation is that of the French revolutionary left, but he aligns himself with those who acquiesce to, or posses, authoritarian power (Kim Jong Un, Vladimir Putin and Jair Bolsonaro) rather than u201cWe the peopleu201d. He characterizes the very organs of societal conversation (the free press), canonized as they are in the first amendment, as u201cThe Enemy of the Peopleu201d, but it is self-evident they are only at enmity with him and the regressive cortege he trawls.

In making this pronouncement, he seeks to deprive the electorate of an informed vote and to set them awash in the river of lies that spews from his titian noggin. All of this enables his perfidious course. He views his inauguration as the dawn of a Trumpian dynasty and continues to groom his daughter Ivanka as successor for the office of the president, thus echoing the conventions of hereditary feudalism.

What choice does the left have but to bulk up, gear up and oppose this threat to the founding fatheru2019s vision? The terms left and right may have evolved in meaning over the centuries but the metaphor remains current.In creating the cartoon above, Ben Garrison evokes the Biblical tale of Samsonu2019s return to God given power.

After defeat by the Philistines at the hand of his tattle telling wife, he commits the ultimate destructive act against his enemies by demolishing the temple of their god, and killing the 4000 people carousing on the roof. It didnu2019t end well for him