Rath said:
Reality is that the war was a combination of horrible intelligence (possibly on purpose from the CIA) and Bush making an (initially succesful) move for political popularity, he thought he needed to be seen to be doing something about terrorism. It was only later that the American population realised that Iraq had nothing at all to do with terrorism.
Edit: @Kasz. The USA without a doubt supported Mubarack and his regime. They were of the belief that a stable dictatorship was better than instability. It's actually one of the few areas where I supported Bush's foreign policy - he strongly pressured Egypt for democratic reform, something that previous administrations and the Obama administration refused to do. Apart from Bush the USA did not really support democracy in Egypt. Also supporting democracy in Iraq is somewhat different from invading Iraq and imposing democracy. |
Although Bush was the strongest, he wasn't the one who started the freedom push.
Besides, like I showed via documents, either in this thread or the other. Obama specifically negoatiated for this outcome to happen.
Though yeah, Bush was the strongest at this. Ironically, looking back on the Bush regime... after years of trying to figure out "what the fuck" he was doing and why he started the Iraq war.... it really does seem like it was a silly reason. Just based on the belief that somehow not only could the US spread democracy based on Military action but that it was are fundamental duty to do so since we could.
Well that and he was apparently lied too by an Iraqi spy. http://www.newsroomamerica.com/story/101684.html
Iraq being the case, because of the above lies and... well when most people make a decsion like that they usually go with the most appealing choice to them and not the logical choice.








