Q: Did Dick Cheney think it was a good idea to go after Saddam by invading Iraq?
A: Surprisingly, no.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZeAlvpuyH0
Q: But didn't 9/11 change everything, and that's why we decided that going after Saddam was worth it?
A: Actually, the administration was preparing to invade Iraq well prior to 9/11.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=inyCkCvqRO0
Q: But didn't the fact Saddam had WMDs mean we had to take action?
A: According to President Bush, Iraq had no WMDs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soohikNdbWs
Q: But didn't the President say Iraq had attempted to acquire nuclear materials from Niger?
A: Yes, and the documents he referred to were not only forgeries, but such bad forgeries that a mere Google search would have revealed that they were fake.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NCH4CB5w3c
Q: So perhaps they didn't have WMDs, and perhaps we acted upon bad intel. But didn't Vice President Cheney report that it was confirmed that Iraqi intelligence agents met with one of the 9/11 hijackers?
A: He did say that, but according to him, he didn't.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0Odd429CsA
Q: But didn't Iraq have something to do with 9/11?
A: The President has stated unequivocally that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1MaC7_tgJQ
Q: But at least now Al Qaeda is on the run and getting weaker because of our presence in Iraq.
A: Actually Al Qaeda did not exist in Iraq until after we invaded, but they are now spread throughout the region and they are now stronger not only since we invaded, but since 9/11.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blF04rs0CcI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=As1G08TUrIY
Q: Okay, but isn't it good that we are fighting them over there? After all, if we leave, they'll only follow us home.
A: Not according to one of the world's foremost experts on bin Laden and the former head of the CIA's bin Laden Unit, Michael Scheuer:
“To the extent that we disengage
-- not to please the enemy but to see if it is in the interest of the
United States -- bin Laden’s ability to keep that momentum
going toward the ‘far enemy’ as they call us, rather than
the near enemy, the governments at home, will lessen…
“They are not interested in fighting us for any longer than they have to. They want to go after their main enemies - and so they want to get us out of there as fast as they can.”
Q: But wouldn't they still want to attack us because they hate us for our freedom? Isn't that why they attacked us on September 11th?
A: If you read bin Laden and Al Qaeda's fatwa against the United States, which explains their aims, you won't find our freedom mentioned once, but you will find example after example of complaints about our military presence and interference in Muslim countries. This interference did not, has not, and will not serve our vital national interests, especially considering the types of suicidal maniacs it inspires to attack us.
http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/980223-fatwa.htm
As you can see, just as Presidential candidate Ron Paul has argued consistently, we should have gone into Afghanistan to find bin Laden and shut down Al Qaeda and not been distracted by Iraq. But we should fight the war, win it, and come home, and abstain from meddling in the affairs of other nations, lest we again needlessly expose ourselves to terrorist attack.
Q: But isn't Ron Paul an anti-war pacifist who is weak on national defense?
A: Ron Paul is often referred to as an “anti-war” candidate, but he is not a pacifist and does believe that war is sometimes necessary for our national defense, such was the case in Afghanistan. But he believes that wars should only be fought when in the vital national interests (i.e. true national defense rather than to enforce UN mandates), and when they are, that they should be formally declared by the US Congress, as mandated by the Constitution.
As for being weak on national defense, Ron Paul wants to strengthen our military by reducing the strain and needless expense created by spreading them thinly across the world in over 700 bases in 63 foreign countries, many of which no longer need us there. Ronald Reagan himself once said, “Ron Paul is one of the outstanding leaders fighting for a stronger national defense. As a former Air Force officer, he knows well the needs of our armed forces, and he always puts them first. We need to keep him fighting for our country.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c78sNGHowl4