Amazon.com Widgets

Do you think the invasion of Iraq in 2003 was worthwhile despite not finding any weapons of mass destruction?

  • Yes, I think the invasion of Iraq in 2003 was worthwhile despite not finding any weapons of mass destruction.

    I think that while no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq in 2003, the venture was still worthwhile because it showed the resolve of the USA to take a proactive approach to any issues that may put the safety of the world in danger. I think that it is a principle that continues on today.

  • Yes it was

    Yes, this invasion was worth it, because we had strong beliefs that there were weapons of mass destruction over their, so we needed to go and check everything out. Plus, we took out a lot of hostile forces to the US, that did not need to be our running free.

  • Invasion Of Iraq

    I personally think that the Invasion of Iraq in 2003 was worthwhile despite not finding any weapons of mass destruction because it has affected the troops the United States that fought in the war. I personally think that the invasion of Iraq in 2003 was worthwhile because it was a war that needed to be handled because if not it would have made matters worse.

  • The USA's Action did not line up to their intentions

    While it is admirable that the USA rid Iraq of Hussein's rule, it is definitely questionable as to whether it was their Right and / or their Responsibility to do so. The reason cited by the United States for invading Iraq was the possibility of WMD's (Weapons of Mass Destruction), which - as is common knowledge - were never found. Furthermore, the hypocrisy ( and irony ) of the United States taking action against these - alleged - WMD's cannot be forgotten, simply due to the fact that the USA itself is the world's foremost nuclear superpower. The operation, later dubbed 'Operation Iraqi Freedom', was the USA's attempt at helping the Iraqi people overcome a tyrannical and corrupt government. However, this was never the USA's problem to absolve or amend. History shows - time, and time again - that oppressed peoples will not allow themselves to remain oppressed, e.g. the Russian / Bolshevik Revolution, the anti-Apartheid movement in South Africa, the French Revolution, etc. History also demonstrates that such revolutions do not take place solely via the help of other nations, especially not by other nations openly declaring war on them. As can be seen in other places where the United States has intervened, hardly any good has ever come from the USA's "help", such as in Vietnam (where help was not wanted), Korea (which is now two separate nations, one of which is stricken with abject poverty and a Dictatorial leader), Germany during the Cold War (which created so much poverty that it became cheaper for Germans to burn money than to buy firewood), or even in Cuba, where Guantanamo Bay is still torturing and murdering innocent people to this day. According to the Iraq Body Count Project,

  • The USA's Motives do not fit with their actions.

    While it is admirable that the USA rid Iraq of Hussein's rule, it is definitely questionable as to whether it was their Right and / or their Responsibility to do so. The reason cited by the United States for invading Iraq was the possibility of WMD's (Weapons of Mass Destruction), which - as is common knowledge - were never found. Furthermore, the hypocrisy ( and irony ) of the United States taking action against these - alleged - WMD's cannot be forgotten, simply due to the fact that the USA itself is the world's foremost nuclear superpower. The operation, later dubbed 'Operation Iraqi Freedom', was the USA's attempt at helping the Iraqi people overcome a tyrannical and corrupt government. However, this was never the USA's problem to absolve or amend. History shows - time, and time again - that oppressed peoples will not allow themselves to remain oppressed, e.g. the Russian / Bolshevik Revolution, the anti-Apartheid movement in South Africa, the French Revolution, etc. History also demonstrates that such revolutions do not take place solely via the help of other nations, especially not by other nations openly declaring war on them. As can be seen in other places where the United States has intervened, hardly any good has ever come from the USA's "help", such as in Vietnam (where help was not wanted), Korea (which is now two separate nations, one of which is stricken with abject poverty and a Dictatorial leader), Germany during the Cold War (which created so much poverty that it became cheaper for Germans to burn money than to buy firewood), or even in Cuba, where Guantanamo Bay is still torturing and murdering innocent people to this day. According to the Iraq Body Count Project,

  • It was waste of time and resources

    No, I do not believe that the 2003 invasion of Iraq was worthwhile. First, the thing that drove us into Iraq, weapons of mass destruction, we're never found. So in retrospect there was reason for the invasion. It did give the Iraqi people a chance to experience Democracy, but this was not a reason to risk American soldiers lives.

  • The invasion was not worth it.

    The invasion was definitely not worthwhile. There were too many lives lost both in the military and innocent bystanders. Many families had to cope with too many issues when a soldier got home from duty. Some were injuries and others were just finding a way to get to a new normal. Then there was all the money the government spent. It was money that has now made the United States deficit so high an also helped put the economy in a downward spiral.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.