Iraq's WMDs

if you don't condone them then surely you would support an invasion of the USA? No? Then you are a hypocrite.

Exported to Syria? That means Syria is now a nuclear state and is untouchable... so why are people so why are we and France so keen to start funding the rebels there?

No. I don't condone the use of nuclear weapons, that doesn't mean I believe we should invade any country who has used them offensively.

You don't believe we should invade countries that have used nuclear weapons, but you do believe we should invade ones that have used chemical weapons like Iraq?

I don't condone the use of nuclear weapons, including their use by the USA 70 years ago. If they did not, I think those who orchestrated the bombing should stand trial. We brought Saddam to trial, however, the decision to hang him was, regrettable.

Whether or not you like this fact they probably saved lives by dropping those bombs.

They probably did, they also killed a lot of civilians, which in my opinion, means they should stand trial to determine whether or not that course of action was justifiable.

That was the way that war was fought, it was total war. You can't fight a war like that in the shadow of prosecution.

War does not justify the slaughter of civilians.

If civilians are killed on such a massive scale, such as in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, there should be an investigation into whether or not that action was justifiable.

You can and must fight war in the shadow of prosecution, war is no excuse to commit immoral or unjustifiable acts.

As an Iraqi, the majority of us despise Saddam Hussein (he´s the reason I don´t live in Iraq) and were very happy when he was excecuted.
But the idea that the US attacked Iraq because Saddam had WMD´s is bull****. The Americans very well knew that Iraq didn´t have any WMD´s, and it was supported by various reports from the CIA which Bush completely ignored.
Also the idea that Iraq were responsible for 9/11 is also pure bull****, so it wasn´t to combat international terrorism either.
The reason the US invaded Iraq was to gain strategic control over Iraq’s hydrocarbon reserves and in doing so maintain the U.S. dollar as the monopoly currency for the critical international oil market.
This because in September 2000 the idiot Saddam decided that Iraq was no longer going to accept dollars for oil being sold under the UN’s Oil-for-Food program, and decided to switch to the euro as Iraq’s oil export currency making the dollar weaker in comparison to the euro. (In mid-2003 the euro was valued approx. 13% higher than the dollar)

The reason is money and always has been.

As a result of the war more than a million Iraqis have died and every day there is a car bombing in which at least 20 innocent people are killed.
We might be a more democratic country now than before but in terms of the amount of people dying today it´s still worse than before.
Hopefully one day we will have absolute control of our country.

Exported to Syria? That means Syria is now a nuclear state and is untouchable... so why are people so why are we and France so keen to start funding the rebels there?

I really do wish people wouldn't bang on about Hiroshima and Nagasaki. What was the problem?

So let me get this straight, the government lied to you about an entire war. Then whisle blowers turn around talking about reports that 'suggest' Iraq had no WMDs and you are going to take that without a pinch of salt?

Why are you so keen to believe a government that has supposedly lied to you?

A book by a General in the Iraqi Air Force claimed the weapons had been exported. Why not believe him? The book is 'Saddam's Secrets'.

I remember watching a documentary on this not long ago, the guy admitted that he lied. I will try to find it.