Dick 'n Dubya were only doing what Americans, their constituents, wanted when they invaded Iraq

[Fumesucker]

It's not up to leaders to make decisions based on things like practicality, prudence, evidence and morality, they are there to do as the people who voted for them would wish in every instance. In 2003 the majority of Americans believed that Iraq was involved with the 9/11 attacks and therefore Americans wanted to attack Iraq so Snarl and Dim Son were morally obligated to attack Iraq, they had no choice in the matter despite what their own judgment of the situation might have been.

****************************************

Sounds pretty stupid, no?

Well, there's another OP up right now using just the same reasoning about some other politician and it has 26 recs as I type this, I'm sure everyone who recced that thread will be over here reccing this one shortly.

[MannyGoldstein]

1. Damned straight

How many of us were still suffering from PTSD?

They did the only thing they could.

[House of Roberts]

2. You're putting the cart before the horse.

In 2003 the majority of Americans believed that Iraq was involved with the 9/11 attacks and therefore Americans wanted to attack Iraq so Snarl and Dim Son were morally obligated to attack Iraq, they had no choice in the matter despite what their own judgment of the situation might have been.

Every Bush Admin official that made it onto any type of media, ingrained this lie into those majority of Americans. That was the neocon wet dream, to be able to attack Iraq, and get the oil out without Saddam getting his hands on the money from it.

[Fumesucker]

3. They never said that Iraq was responsible for 9/11

Oh they certainly conflated Iraq with 9/11 and used a lot of rhetorical tricks to make it seem that way but they never actually said it.

Not that it matters anyway, the position is that politicians are duty bound to do what their constituents want, how the constituents started wanting something is immaterial.