# OK, NO WMD's: So WHY DID Bush Go To War? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 14, 2004, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ok-no-wmds-so-why-did-bush-go-to-war/269183 "2004-10-14T13:22:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 10:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ok-no-wmds-so-why-did-bush-go-to-war/269183/21 "2004-10-14T22:57:08Z")
> [@BwanaBob](#): > > How about “the scumbag killed 200,000 people” ? (sorry no cite). They just found > another mass grave of Kurds. > > Or don’t they matter :rolleyes: That would work, if the US went after every scumbag who did the same thing. And we haven’t. Hell, in some cases, we supported and even encouraged them! Saddam, in fact, was one of our guys during the Reagan administration. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [October 14, 2004, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ok-no-wmds-so-why-did-bush-go-to-war/269183/22 "2004-10-14T23:02:21Z")
> [@BwanaBob](#): > > How about “the scumbag killed 200,000 people” ? (sorry no cite). They just found > another mass grave of Kurds. > > Or don’t they matter :rolleyes: As others have noted, we supported Saddam while he was using chemical weapons against the Iranians. And, while people make dramatic claims about how many people he killed, the fact is that most of these killings occurred either when he was being allowed to make war on his neighbors or before we had instituted the No-Fly zones to protect the Kurds. In other words, he was contained. He was still probably killing some people but one has to ask how many, given that the estimated civilian death toll in Iraq from the war is already 13-15,000. As for the Bush Administration’s motivations: There are two problems with the theory that they did it because they really believed Saddam had WMD. First off, even if the intelligence led them astray at first, by the time February and March rolled around, the inspectors were already finding that the U.S. intelligence was [“garbage upon garbage upon garbage.”](http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/01/18/iraq/main537096.shtml) Second, even if they believed that Saddam had WMD, it is hard to believe that they were that seriously concerned about these getting into the hands of terrorists. For if they were, how does one explain how lackadaisical they seemed to be about securing potential WMD sites and even sites known to contain some nuclear materials that had been locked down by the IAEA. If you are really concerned about WMD getting into the hands of terrorists, you shouldn’t embark on a policy that makes this more likely (particularly given that your intelligence service is telling you that Saddam would be very unlikely to give WMD to terrorists). ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 8:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ok-no-wmds-so-why-did-bush-go-to-war/269183/23 "2004-10-15T08:32:48Z")
The mass graves are either from 1991, or from the nid 1980’s. [Mid 1980’s, you say?](http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/09/30/sproject.irq.regime.change/) ---
**Author:** ![furt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/439d5e/32.png) [@furt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furt)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 8:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ok-no-wmds-so-why-did-bush-go-to-war/269183/24 "2004-10-15T08:39:43Z")
[For the OP.](http://denbeste.nu/essays/strategic_overview.shtml) ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 8:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ok-no-wmds-so-why-did-bush-go-to-war/269183/25 "2004-10-15T08:43:38Z")
Why did he go to war? C’mon, haven’t you been paying attention? 1. Because if we let our guard down, Saddam might have developed the potential to possibly begin a program of rebuilding his capacity to theoretically develop weapons of mass destruction. 2. Isn’t the world better off without Saddam? 3. Why do you hate America? ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 8:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ok-no-wmds-so-why-did-bush-go-to-war/269183/26 "2004-10-15T08:54:09Z")
**furt** , was that link serious? The tone of the discourse suggested it was, but the title suggested it was parodying those who presented such arguments. In case it _was_ serious, **why weren’t those arguments presented _before_ the invasion?** ---
**Author:** ![furt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/439d5e/32.png) [@furt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furt)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 9:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ok-no-wmds-so-why-did-bush-go-to-war/269183/27 "2004-10-15T09:21:19Z")
> [@SentientMeat](#): > > **furt** , was that link serious? Yes, very much so. The title was just the self-deprecating name of the blog. Please note that I’m not interested in defending what’s in there (I don’t agree with all of it); it’s provided for those who sincerely say they don’t know. > [@](#): > > In case it _was_ serious, **why weren’t those arguments presented _before_ the invasion?** 1. Some of the things on there were not things that administrations can productively say out loud. i.e. “The whole Arab world has to be dragged into the 20th century” But Bush has talked many times about the root cause of Arab anger being opppressive governments (many historically backed by the US). None of this has been secret; which is not to say it’s been covered and explained by the news media, either. 1. Whenever a multi-faceted rationale was offered, critics in the media (and on this board) kept saying that multiple rationales were confusing or contradictory. People didn’t want nuance or complicated arguments. WMD was settled on as simple, easily explainable and salable; i.e. for political reasons. [[http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/06/04/nyt.friedman/](http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/06/04/nyt.friedman/)]This]( [url) has more from someone who’s no fan of Bush. ---
**Author:** ![furt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/439d5e/32.png) [@furt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furt)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 9:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ok-no-wmds-so-why-did-bush-go-to-war/269183/28 "2004-10-15T09:23:42Z")
I meant [this.](http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/06/04/nyt.friedman/) ---
**Author:** ![SentientMeat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/43a26b/32.png) [@SentientMeat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SentientMeat)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 9:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ok-no-wmds-so-why-did-bush-go-to-war/269183/29 "2004-10-15T09:37:36Z")
> [@](#): > > Bush has talked many times about the root cause of Arab anger being opppressive governments. He also, many times, _denied_ that “regime change” was the justification for the war, given the precedent it sets. That whole link seems to present justifications which, no matter how convincing (and I find them _all_ highly dubious), simply _were not proposed_ by the administration. For an administration to lead its country into a war of invasion based on arguments which **it does not explicitly present to its electorate** is sheer, blatant deception. > [@](#): > > People didn’t want nuance or complicated arguments. This does not justify _deception_: heck, almost _any_ issue requires the government to explain its policies in detail. That link is a justification for **hegemony**. If th eUS invaded Iraq for **hegemonic** reasons, its government should have told its electorate so explicitly. ---
**Author:** ![furt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/439d5e/32.png) [@furt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furt)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 9:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ok-no-wmds-so-why-did-bush-go-to-war/269183/30 "2004-10-15T09:50:59Z")
Whatever. I’ve no interest in debating whether they are _good_ reasons or not, or whether the admin should have been blunter. It was presented as a fairly accurate answer to the OP. ---
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 10:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ok-no-wmds-so-why-did-bush-go-to-war/269183/31 "2004-10-15T10:10:22Z")
> [@furt](#): > > It was presented as a fairly accurate answer to the OP. Ah, remember when the Iraq situation started, the accusations of Imperialism, the - _‘no at best it’s hegomony !’_ , the _‘Saddam is Eeevil and POTUS wouldn’t lie’_ and the- _‘no, why do you hate America?!’_ So, we were right, it _is_ imperialism after all. ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ok-no-wmds-so-why-did-bush-go-to-war/269183/32 "2004-10-15T13:16:07Z")
I wonder how much of it was to deflect potential election-time criticism that 9/11 happened on their watch. I have no doubt that if Gore were president, he’d be hammered into a thin goo over 9/11 happening on his watch. ---
**Author:** ![wisernow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/13edae/32.png) [@wisernow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wisernow)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 4:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ok-no-wmds-so-why-did-bush-go-to-war/269183/33 "2004-10-15T16:30:31Z")
> [@stpauler](#): > > Bush to the UN > Quote: (SOURCE: [WHITEHOUSE.GOV](http://WHITEHOUSE.GOV)) > Quote: > We know that Saddam Hussein pursued weapons of mass murder even when inspectors were in his country. Are we to assume that he stopped when they left? The history, the logic, and the facts lead to one conclusion: Saddam Hussein’s regime is a grave and gathering danger. To suggest otherwise is to hope against the evidence. To assume this regime’s good faith is to bet the lives of millions and the peace of the world in a reckless gamble. And this is a risk we must not take. Modified version(changes in red): We know that the POTUS pursued weapons of mass murder…snip…The history, the logic, and the facts lead to one conclusion: GWB’s regime is a grave and gathering danger. To suggest otherwise is to hope against the evidence. To assume this regime’s good faith is to bet the lives of millions and the peace of the world in a reckless gamble. > [@stpauler](#): > > Address by Bush 10/7/02 (SOURCE: [WHITEHOUSE.GOV](http://WHITEHOUSE.GOV)) > Quote: > The threat comes from Iraq. It arises directly from the Iraqi regime’s own actions – its history of aggression, and its drive toward an arsenal of terror. …snip… > First, some ask why Iraq is different from other countries or regimes that also have terrible weapons. While there are many dangers in the world, the threat from Iraq stands alone – because it gathers the most serious dangers of our age in one place. Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction are controlled by a murderous tyrant who has already used chemical weapons to kill thousands of people. This same tyrant has tried to dominate the Middle East, has invaded and brutally occupied a small neighbor, has struck other nations without warning, and holds an unrelenting hostility toward the United States. Modified version(changes in red): The threat comes from the US. It arises directly from the US regime’s own actions – its history of aggression, and its drive toward an arsenal of terror. …snip… First, some ask why US is different from other countries or regimes that also have terrible weapons. While there are many dangers in the world, the threat from US stands alone – because it gathers the most serious dangers of our age in one place. US’s weapons of mass destruction are controlled by a murderous tyrant who has already used all types of weapons to kill thousands of people. This same tyrant has tried to dominate the Middle East, has invaded and brutally occupied a country, has struck other nations without warning, and holds an unrelenting hostility toward those it pleases. Hmmm…interesting! Very few changes to the original speeches by Bush. But they make a lot of sense, in fact even more than the original ones! ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ok-no-wmds-so-why-did-bush-go-to-war/269183/34 "2004-10-15T16:39:29Z")
> [@BwanaBob](#): > > How about “the scumbag killed 200,000 people” ? (sorry no cite). They just found > another mass grave of Kurds. > > Or don’t they matter :rolleyes: Your point? Because Saddam did it (with full knowledge of US offcials) it’s OK for the [US to continue](http://www.iraqbodycount.net/)? I’ll take your :rolleyes: and raise it :rolleyes: :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![stpauler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9d8465/32.png) [@stpauler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stpauler)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2004, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ok-no-wmds-so-why-did-bush-go-to-war/269183/35 "2004-10-15T17:06:11Z")
> [@wisernow](#): > > Hmmm…interesting! Very few changes to the original speeches by Bush. But they make a lot of sense, in fact even more than the original ones! Political madlibs!!! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ok-no-wmds-so-why-did-bush-go-to-war/269183.md?page=1)