1 / 11

Iraq Powerpoint 2

Iraq Powerpoint 2. The Road to War… Again. Saddam Hussein’s Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

briana
Download Presentation

Iraq Powerpoint 2

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Iraq Powerpoint 2 The Road to War… Again

  2. Saddam Hussein’s Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Ten days after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, President Bush was advised that U.S. intelligence found no credible connection linking the attacks to the regime of Saddam Hussein, or evidence suggesting linkage between Saddam and the al-Qaida terrorist network, according to a published report. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10164478/ns/us_news-security/t/report--iraq-link-refuted-days-after-attack/#.T65dwOg7WAg No link between Iraq and Al Qaeda

  3. So why did the US invade Iraq in 2003? The Question

  4. In the 1990s, a group called the Project for a New American Centurydeveloped what would become President George W. Bush’s foreign policy plans. Its members were all neoconservative, or “Neocons” who shared an ambitious plan for America in the 2000s. President Bush’s entire foreign policy team—those who would help him construct his foreign policy—were believers in the group’s plan to help keep America strong. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1665.htm PNAC: The Project for a New American Century

  5. According to the Neocons of PNAC, to make America secure in the 2000s, the plan was to: • Create “regime change” (take out old leaders and put in different ones) in countries with unpopular leaders who do not support the US—especially in the Middle East. (It was generally suggested that Iraq would be first, and Iran would be next.) PNAC was absolutely right about the unpopularity of these dictators. • Use the wars needed for regime change to establish a permanent US military presence in the Middle East. • Plan on being greeted warmly as liberators by grateful citizens of these nations for getting rid of their hated leaders, and for US-style democracy to take hold in the region. The Plan

  6. History shows that the Neocons were absolutely right about the unpopularity of dictators across the Middle East and the people’s desire for more freedom and better government. This was shown in the Arab Spring demonstrations and revolutions of 2011-2013 in which the common people of Egypt, Libya, Tunisia and many other countries protested until their unpopular dictators quit. Other mass protests (most notably in Iran and Syria) were unsuccessful and brought violence, but the Middle Eastern people’s desire for freedom, democracy, and good government came through loud and clear. What they got Right

  7. However, the Neocons agreed in the PNAC report that getting both Americans’ and the world’s approval of wars for “regime change” would be nearly impossible “absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event —like a new Pearl Harbor.” (PNAC) The Problem

  8. In his January 2002 State of the Union Address (the first since September 11,) President Bush declared Iran, Iraq, and North Korea to be an “Axis of Evil”, claimed that “Our ‘War on Terror’ is just beginning”, and suggested that any nation developing “Weapons of Mass Destruction” such as chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons could be targeted for military action even if the threat to America was neither direct nor immediate. The same would be true for any nation supporting terrorists. This speech can be considered the birth of the “Bush Doctrine” in which the US declared the right to defend itself by attacking countries or targets within countries that the US considered hostile and a possible threat to American security. Involving Iraq

  9. Between September 2001 and 2003, Bush and Vice President Cheney gave the following reasons (see next slide) why the US needed to invade Iraq even though we had not yet captured Osama bin Laden or stabilized Afghanistan. The Reasons…

  10. This is what the American public was told. None of it turned out to be true. • Iraq possessed, and was making and hiding “Weapons of Mass Destruction”—chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, • Saddam Hussein was actively trying to buy materials for nuclear weapons, • Iraq had the capability of attacking the United States without warning, and was probably planning to do so, • Saddam Hussein supported and had connections to Al-Qaeda, (When the war broke out 45% of Americans believed in error that Saddam Hussein was involved in the 9/11 attacks.) • The Iraqis would welcome us as liberators and support an invasion. The Reasons for WarSOURCES: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/23/bush.iraq/http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0314/p02s01-woiq.htmlhttp://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/06/29/bush.intl/index.html?eref=sitesearch

  11. Despite a strong protest movement, the war was generally popular as Americans believed the President and were terrified of more attacks so soon after 9/11. More than half of Americans believed at the time that Iraq was involved with Al Qaeda and the 9/11 attacks. Most of the rest of the world was strongly against the US and its allies’ invasion of Iraq…especially as Iraq had not directly threatened the US. Prelude to a War

More Related