Their entire theory is based upon hatred for America (and the west in general) and freedom. They would rather that people be murdered, raped, and beaten, by a dictator and his regime, rather than free with a functioning government of the people. They hate the idea that others may have freedom which is why they are always looking to take freedoms from their neighbors, but I'll get into that later.
The first argument that they bring up is "bush lied". Well this is a flawed argument in many ways. Their target is one person, but if bush lied, so did most all of the west and many high profile democrats including John Kerry (who they probably voted for in 2004).
"Saddam has been engaged in the development of WMD technology which isAs we can see, it had been common knowledge for years that Saddam was pursuing a large arsenal of WMD's. Now, they'll usually bring up that the source lied. There were multiple sources that confirmed the same thing, they [the government] just trusted this one the most. When you're misinformed by people you trust, that doesn't make you a liar if you pass on the information, it simply propagates misinformation.
a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the
weapons inspection process."
-- Rep. NANCY PELOSI (D, CA) DEC 16, 1998
"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons
programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear
programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status......
LETTER TO PRESIDENT BUSH SIGNED BY
-- BOB GRAHAM (Democrat FL) DEC 5, 2001
"We KNOW that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical
weapons throughout his country." AL GORE SEPT 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for WMD has proven impossible to deter and we should
assume that is will continue for as long as Saddam is in power"
-- AL GORE SEPT 23, 2002
"We have known for years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing
weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. TEDDY KENNEDY (D, MA) SEPT 27, 2002
"I believe that a deadly arsenal of WMD in his hands is a real and
grave threat to our security."
-- Sen JOHN KERRY OCT 9, 2002 (PRIOR TO BUSH'S CALL FOR WAR)
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal,
murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime... He represents a
particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to
miscalculation... And now he is miscalculating America's response to
his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for WMD... So the threat
of Saddam Hussein with WMD is real."
-- Sen JOHN KERRY JAN 23, 2003
"We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of
chemical and biological weapons, and has since embarked on a crach
course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities.
Intelligence reports that Saddam is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. ROBERT BYRD (D, PA?) OCT 9, 2002
"He [Saddam Hussein] has systematically violated, over the course of
the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded
that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons and any
nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
-- Rep. HENRY WAXMAN (Democrat, CA) OCT 10, 2002
"We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress
Saddam has made in development of WMD."
-- Sen JAY ROCKEFELLER (Democrat WV) OCT 10, 2002
Also, we removed multiple chemical weapons and 550 metric tons of yellow cake from Iraq. Then later, 53 tons more were sent to canada (which was the niger yellow cake, dang it, that destroys the bush lied argument). And lets not forget Iraq had just refused to allow U.N. inspectors in, signaling guilt.
94 countries believed that Iraq had WMD's including Iran and Israel who are enemies, yet their intelligence said the same thing.
So lets move on, bush didn't lie. Now they don't have an argument that it was illegal so they will move on to the idea that we had no business being in there, we aren't the world police. Well I beg to differ, we are the world police, whether we should be or not is up for debate. I think we should be, but only because the world without America is quite scary... just think about it. No America = Germany and Japan winning WWII.
Anyway, this was a very moral war. Saddam gassed the Kurds, tortured his people, killed his people, his sons raped women, killed political dissenters, and in general the Iraqis lived in fear of him daily. We overthrew him and instituted democracy. Ask any Iraqi that lived through the 80's - 90's if Iraq is better now than then, the answer will always be yes. Does Iraq still have problems? Of course it does. But as they evolve into more civil people the (terrorist) problems will dwindle.
Then they'll move on to the war for oil argument, which is absurd. There is ZERO EVIDENCE!! Even if there were some evidence (but there isn't), is it a crime that there was a benefit to overthrowing a vicious dictator? These people hate win-win, they wanted the Iraq war to be a win for Iraq and a loss for America, because they hate America and freedom. Think honestly and rationally, you're overthrowing a dictator, which requires occupation until things settle down. They have natural resources, using them is bad? Why? I mean, if we farmed there would it be stealing too? IF we were using their oil, it was for operations in the region. We weren't shipping it back to the states that's for sure... $4/gallon gas anyone???
So lets reflect,
Bush lied? Nope.
Illegal war? Nope.
Immoral war? Nope.
War for oil? Nope.
A little common sense and research goes a long way.
To use an already overused cliche; "With great power comes great responsibility". America and the west have great power, and thus are required, morally, to police the world to an extent. I wonder what people would say if we didn't help countries in need. Spreading freedom is never a bad thing.