Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

Was the Iraq war the biggest foreign policy blunder since Vietnam?

An ill-conceived war of choice against a nation that did NOT attack us.

Propped up charges of Weapons of Mass Destruction that did NOT exist.

A proposed connection to Al Queda, 9/11 and the Taliban that was FALSE.

If, as John McCain claims, the war was not a blunder, then was this misinformation INTENTIONAL, and not a blunder but a criminal act to invade and conquer a foreign sovereign nation?

Update:

@ Right On: So you admit that all the false information was just a pretext to invade and oust a foreign leader without actual justification?

Update 2:

@ momma: Great point.

Conservatives preened about how we were bringing "democracy to the Middle East". Yet, they neglect to recall haw there USED TO BE two democracies there. Iran and Iraq. And we supported the overthrow of their governments in the 60's and 80's.

Update 3:

@ Commandante: You did not answer the question. UN sanctions were in place and working, he gasses his people decades prior, and the war was that removed him was based on lies. FACT.

Update 4:

@ David: I recall the Panama deal, but I also recall that we had signed a treaty when the canal was build to relinquish control of the area when we did. We were contractually obligated to do so. Opening US travel to Cuba will also instill capitalism and would have weakened Castro's control.

Update 5:

@ Lyle: I do not care who believed the lies, or who went along with the conspiracy. Some democrats went along, and other fell for the scheme. But if this was intentional, then we had war criminals running this country for eight years. And the MSM pounded the war drums willingly, and those who sopke out against this war were shut down, muzzled and fired.

12 Answers

Relevance
  • 8 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    It's bad, but I still consider the US reinstalling the Shah of Iran after the people had revolted and chosen another government. We are still paying for that today, 60 years later.

  • 5 years ago

    Vietnam relying on whilst you think the warfare started lasted at the least 11 years and killed over 50,000 men and women. Iraq continues to be going on so we will ought to let history come to a decision. Proper now my vote was once placing Saddam Hussein in vigour and giving him weapons. Regerugg you need to supply a definition of victory, for the reason that I nonetheless see the President making shock visits to Iraq and now a foreign carrier Officer has stated that going to Iraq to work within the embassy is tantamount to a demise sentence. If this is victory I particularly hate to look your definition of shedding. As for Vietnam, we had a enemy that was once shooting at the back of rocks and bushes while we were marching in a straight line. We had an enemy that had nothing to lose and had been combating for what they saw used to be proper. Seems I bear in mind this in an extra struggle. Sure we could have grew to become Vietnam right into a parking storage, however what was once the point in that.

  • ?
    Lv 7
    8 years ago

    In a word, yes. One might argue that surrendering our rights to the Panama Canal was bad, but on a scale of one to ten, with Iraq as a ten, Panama is maybe a two. How can it help American prestige abroad when our allies believe we provided them with false intelligence and led them into error?

    The world was so horrified at what we did that Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize simply for not being George W. Bush.

    You know what else has been a colossal foreign policy blunder? Our refusal to recognize Cuba. If we had reached out to them even twenty years ago they would be our friends and allies. Instead we are driving them into the enemy camp.

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    If you're correct...? Well then, there are many dumb democrats.

    -10/10/02 Sen. Hillary Clinton (now Secretary of State) on the Senate floor: “In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members.” She voted to go to war.

    -9/29/02 Al Gore: “Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power. We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country. The nerve agent VX is one of the most toxic ever developed.” He voted to go to war.

    -1/27/03 Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector addressing the UN Security Council: “13,000 chemical bombs were dropped by the Iraqi Air Force between 1983 and 1988, while Iraq has declared that 19,500 bombs were consumed during this period. Thus, there is a discrepancy of 6,500 bombs. The amount of chemical agent in these bombs would be in the order of about 1,000 tons.”

    -2/13/03 Presidential candidate John Kerry: If you don’t believe Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then you shouldn’t vote for me.” He voted to go to war.

    -7/22/03 CNN, Former President Clinton said: “People can argue whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons.”

    -4/21/04 CNN: Senator Hillary Clinton said, "No, I don't regret giving the president authority because at the time it was in the context of weapons of mass destruction, grave threats to the United States, and clearly, Saddam Hussein had been a real problem for the international community for more than a decade." She voted to go to war.

    -7/31/12 Associated Press, Baghdad: Britain will help the Iraqi government dispose of what's left of deposed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons, still stored in two bunkers in north of Baghdad, the British embassy in Baghdad announced Monday.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • ?
    Lv 6
    8 years ago

    Of course. I just refreshed my memory watching Powell, Condi, Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld and others perpetuating lies that were exposed. They stuck to their story and didn't offer details on their findings. They just kept lying until everyone believed it. But that is Republican tradition.

    Vietnam was a blunder.

    Iraq was a conspiracy.

  • 8 years ago

    Yes. I'm not sure if the Bush administration was incredibly incompetent or incredibly corrupt, but either way, it's still the biggest foreign policy blunder since Vietnam.

  • 8 years ago

    Well, I guess that the proven chemical attacks on his own people don't really count. After they were his own people weren't they, didn't he have the right to exterminate them? After all it wasn't any of our business. We should have just butt out.

  • 8 years ago

    Yes.

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    The only blunder in VietNam -- is that Johnson didn't have the courage to carpet bomb Hanoi.

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    We were told Muslims would love us as we won their hearts and minds.

    Little did we know they would be removed from their bodies first...

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.