Talk:American government position on invasion of Iraq
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This page has been cited as a source by a media organization. See the 2006 press source article for details.
The citation is in: "George Bush: Imperial President?", American Daily, 02-04-2006. |
 |
This is a controversial topic, which may be under dispute. Please read this talk page and discuss substantial changes here before making them. Make sure you supply full citations when adding information to highly controversial articles. |
This text was originally located at Support and opposition for the U.S. plan to invade Iraq. A complete history for the text may be found there. - Montréalais 05:03 Feb 16, 2003 (UTC)
- This page is badly in need of maintenace. The first section is better covered in the main article 2003 invasion of Iraq. The second section is not the government position, but rather positions of politicians. I suggest cutting the first section & renaming the article to reflect the content of the second section. Thoughts, reactions? Wolfman 03:27, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
-
- The article is full of errors as well. Powell did not mention the faked niger uranium documents in his speech at the UN. Bush's comment about Africa in his State of the Union message was based on UK intelligence and the UK did not know about the faked Niger document. I think the article should be scrapped and redirected to the main article. RonCram 03:47, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Links for statements
This article ought to have links to each of the listed leaders and their stated positions before the war. I'll do that if I get around to it. --Mr. Billion 07:15, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
I've added links and dates and rewritten some of the "other dignitaries" section. I removed the following few paragraphs referring to legal action to block the war:
Previous suits, of similar merits, have run afoul of numerous obstacles. The Vietnam suit ran into problems because Congress was granting tacit support to the war - including the draft, appropriations, etc.; courts ruled that the 30 to 50 military "advisors" didn't amount to a sufficient enough force for them to render a decision in the El Salvador campaign; The suit versus Clinton fizzled because U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman said Congress had sent "distinctly mixed messages". In November 1990 Judge Greene refused to grant an injunction preventing the second Iraqi war - because Congress had not taken a position regarding the war, and so a ruling would be premature. However but did concur with the plaintiffs that Congress had the sole ability to declare war, so within several days Bush, Sr sought support from Congress for his war.
There's a lot of things wrong with those two paragraphs. It lacks context and sources, to begin with. --Mr. Billion 23:38, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
