0
Did Tony Blair lie about Saddam Hussein not having weapons of mass destruction?
Wiki User
∙ 14y ago
yes, along with Bush.
Wiki User
∙ 14y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
When did the US accuse Saddam Hussein of having illegal weapons?
1999
Which development came last in the 12 months after the us gave Saddam Hussein an ultimatum in march 2003?
they were wrong about Iraq having mass weapons of destruction.
Why did the US go into war with Iraq in 2003?
The US has been in conflict with Iraq several times.The leader of Iraq, Saddam Hussein, has, in the past, been a very aggressive leader, continuing to launch attacks in Kuwait, Syria, and Iran.In the early 2000's, the Central Intelligence Agency received intelligence that Saddam had access to "Weapons of Mass Destruction", so President Bush turned this information over to the United Nations and North Atlantic Treaty Organization.The UN took concern over it and requested that inspectors be deployed to Iraq to try to find if Saddam actually did have access to these weapons or not, but Saddam refused to cooperate.In response, the UN/NATO deployed soldiers to Iraq, believing it was a better choice than allowing Saddam to continue his operations in secrecy. This is what led to the 2003 Invasion of Iraq.By the end of the conflict, Saddam had been detained and executed. These high-powered weapons were never found, and some believe that Iraq never had access to them, but such comments are debateable.At the end of the day, it was a good excuse to wipe out a hostile dictator.
Why is the United States involved in the War in Iraq?
We went to war with Iraq again because the government suspected Saddam Hussein of aiding terrorists and having an arsenal of Weapons of Mass Destruction (Nuclear, Biological[smallpox], and Chemical[nerve gas])
What happened in the 2003 Iraq war?
The Americans won and the Iraqis retreated back to their homeland to plot a different way to destroy the Americans. After the war the Americans shot missiles at the base of the Iraqis to show they wouldn't want to mess with them. Unfortunately, the above answer is a misconception as the Iraqis were unconnected to any attempts to destroy America (9/11 has no connection to Iraq). The Iraq War was an American Invasion of the Iraqi Regime that was believed to have had weapons of mass destruction. Toppling the government occurred early in the War and the majority of the fighting was between guerrillas and the United States Army during the Occupation and Nation-Building Phases. Finally, in 2011 the United States affirmed that Iraq is ready to maintain its own defense and left the country.
When did the US accuse Saddam Hussein of having illegal weapons?
1999
Which development came last in the 12 months after the us gave Saddam Hussein an ultimatum in march 2003?
they were wrong about Iraq having mass weapons of destruction.
What is the current war in Iraq being fought over?
The current "War in Iraq" is being fought, because Saddam Hussein had some weapons of mass destruction or (WMDs) that he wouldn't destroy, also George Bush accused him of having connections with terrorists.
Did American leaders lie in order to invade Iraq?
No. The Central Intelligence Agency received intelligence that Iraq had access to "Weapons of Mass Destruction". This information was reported to President Bush, who had it redirected to the UN and NATO. The UN gave an order for inspectors to go investigate the claims, but the Iraqi leader, Saddam Hussein, refused to cooperate. In response, UN/NATO had to make a decision on how to handle Saddam's refusal, and it was decided that Saddam's past aggressions made him untrustworthy, and that even the slightest possibility of him having heavy weaponry was a threat to national security. It was decided that Saddam was a threat and needed to be removed before he used the weapons to invade his neighbors. These weapons were never recovered. Why they weren't recovered is debatable. Some believe that Iraq never had access to WMD's, while some believe that Iraq managed to conceal them and sell them off last minute.
Which country is mentioned in your reading material as having held so-called elections in which the leader supposedly received 100 of the vote?
Iraq. It was Saddam Hussein.
Why did the US go into war with Iraq in 2003?
The US has been in conflict with Iraq several times.The leader of Iraq, Saddam Hussein, has, in the past, been a very aggressive leader, continuing to launch attacks in Kuwait, Syria, and Iran.In the early 2000's, the Central Intelligence Agency received intelligence that Saddam had access to "Weapons of Mass Destruction", so President Bush turned this information over to the United Nations and North Atlantic Treaty Organization.The UN took concern over it and requested that inspectors be deployed to Iraq to try to find if Saddam actually did have access to these weapons or not, but Saddam refused to cooperate.In response, the UN/NATO deployed soldiers to Iraq, believing it was a better choice than allowing Saddam to continue his operations in secrecy. This is what led to the 2003 Invasion of Iraq.By the end of the conflict, Saddam had been detained and executed. These high-powered weapons were never found, and some believe that Iraq never had access to them, but such comments are debateable.At the end of the day, it was a good excuse to wipe out a hostile dictator.
What were Saddam Hussein's strengths?
Today, very little though some still support his final regime. His main strength was in controlling and having the support of the armed forces and through them the finances of the country.
What are the common justifications for Iraq invasion and foreseen Syria invasion?
The common justification is having weapons of mass destruction. Iraq was accused of having nuclear weapons that proved later to not true. Syria was accused of using chemical weapons against Syrian people although the inspection team have not yet proved whether the chemical weapons used by the government or by the opposition.
Was Saddam Hussein cooperating with Al-Qaeda during the Iraq war?
Saddam Hussein was actually ideologically opposed to everything Al-Qaeda stood for. He never desired or cared for religion, let alone religious politics or Islamism. Saddam Hussein was an ardent Nationalist Secularist and opposed the Internationalist Islamist agenda of Al-Qaeda. Both are notably violent philosophies and both are in the Islamic World, but that is where the similarity ends. Both people/organizations had a fundamentally different view of the world and therefore were not aligned. He did not like the idea of having to give control to small cells that he could not control directly, and he did not like the idea of directly antagonizing the West. (Many of the things he did antagonized the West, but he did not do those things desiring confrontation.) Saddam Hussein's goal was regional supremacy and had no interest in the worldwide regime change advocated by Al-Qaeda. The only reason a relationship developed between Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda after the start of the war is that it quickly became clear that the Iraqi Army could not hold back the American Army and that a guerilla war would be the only viable resistance to foreign occupation. Since Al-Qaeda excels at that type of warfare, he extended an invitation for them to come in, but this occurred only AFTER the Iraq War began.
Did Saddam Hussein have Greek ancestry?
His maternal grandmother was 1/8 of Minoan Ancestry. So he is part greek. There has been some concern over his paternal great-grandfather having ancestry from Cyprus, but those allegations were proven wrong after a DNA test in his autopsy report.
Was Saddam Hussein cooperating with Al-Qaeda long before the US and Britain invaded Iraq?
One OpinionYes he did cooperate with them.Different OpinionSaddam Hussein was actually ideologically opposed to everything Al-Qaeda stood for. He never desired or cared for religion, let alone religious politics or Islamism. Saddam Hussein was an ardent Nationalist Secularist and opposed the Internationalist Islamist agenda of Al-Qaeda. Both are notably violent philosophies and both are in the Islamic World, but that is where the similarity ends. Both people/organizations had a fundamentally different view of the world and therefore were not aligned. He did not like the idea of having to give control to small cells that he could not control directly, and he did not like the idea of directly antagonizing the West. (Many of the things he did antagonized the West, but he did not do those things desiring confrontation.) Saddam Hussein's goal was regional supremacy and had no interest in the worldwide regime change advocated by Al-Qaeda.The only reason a relationship developed between Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda after the start of the war is that it quickly became clear that the Iraqi Army could not hold back the American Army and that a guerilla war would be the only viable resistance to foreign occupation. Since Al-Qaeda excels at that type of warfare, he extended an invitation for them to come in, but this occurred only AFTER the Iraq War began.
3 weapons of mass destruction?
What i think the weapon of mass destruction it depend on which aspect or part of the world you are talking with. For example what i see in most African countries the mass destruction can be viewed in-terms of poverty,HIV/AIDS and war. So these three to me in African perspective can be termed as weapon of mass destruction. Aisha Abbas Seif- Zanzibar Tanzania.Typically the 3 types are referred to as "NBC", which stands for Nuclear, Biological, Chemical. But within each of these types there are thousands of specific weapons. All of them have the common feature, unlike other weapons, of having unusually high probability of causing damage and deaths in areas well outside the intended target area and to do so in a very unpredictable manner.
