1. WMD's Were Found in Iraq and Afghanistan. "Nonetheless, in response to a question from committee member Curt Weldon, Col. Chui agreed that the munitions met the technical definition of weapons of mass destruction. "These are chemical weapons as defined under the Chemical Weapons Convention and yes, sir, they do constitute weapons of mass destruction."" [1][2][3]
2. The oil is going to France and China, and american oil companies would have lost money if foreign competition was opened up, this is a basic law of supply and demand, to not want more competition. So not only did the U.S. not do this, but it wouldn't make logical sense. [1][2][3]
3. Iraq was not horribly destabilized by the U.S. intervention, and the war itself was not started by the U.S.
4. The U.S. did not kill hundreds of thousands of people, Saddam did.
5. Iraq's weapons predominately came from the soviet union. With the ak-47 being the most prolific gun in the world, next to other soviet or soviet-replica weapons such as the PKM, RPG-7, T-72 tank and so on, it should be rather obvious that the U.S. did not arm them or most entities. The cartels, terrorists and most dictatorships all use the Ak-47, with over 100 million in the world.
6. Iraq was Socialist, known as Ba'thist socialist, or literally "Arab National Socialist", or Arab Nazi. Created with the assistance of the Nazi's in the 1940's, the concept of pure Aryan, Persian descedence is still common in the middle east, including Syria and Libya, as is hating the jews.
7. Invasion caused ISIS to form
8. Perhaps the most hilarious argument is the idea that the war somehow was bad for the economy. Despite war historically almost always being good for the economy, and liberals making the dual argument that the war was for money and to make money, they also claim it was simultaneously good at making money but bad for the economy. While one could come up with no less than 1000 forms of mental gymnastics to try and prove this point, the objective reality is that it is false. Two factors must be weighed, initially, the cost of the conflict, and secondly the
9. Despite the notion that drones killed thousands of civilians, their design from the beginning was actually to reduce civilian casualties. Using the smallest plane with the smallest missile that removed as much human error as possible, via an unpiloted aircraft, the Drones have thus far had a civilian death rate of approximately 1% or less, with around 17 civilians killed out of 2000 strikes. While all civilian deaths are bad, it's better to reduce civilian casualties in any conflict, thus making such an endeavor useful. The media's incredibly misleading argument, such as Salon, the Guardian and others who claim 38 high-value targets being killed means the remaining 98% were civilians, is patently absurd, as these represent figures that were merely known about beforehand. By the very argument of these sources, the argument is that the 98% figure "must be" all civilians, despite them simply being those who were not terrorist leaders, merely terrorist subordinates. This disgusting and flagrantly misleading lie has lead many to want to discontinue the drone program, despite objectively saving civilian lives and being less deadly than other alternatives, such as using 3000 pound cruise missiles over 30 pound gryphon missiles which only kill a few people at a time.
10. Most of the world's dictatorships in the last 100 years were socialist or communist, be them the Nazis who were national socialist, the Communists and so on. Of these, the majority were assisted by the communists, usually in their direct creation, although, the Nazis and Italian fascists formed on their own, despite being allies and starting WWII in 1939 via the invasion of Poland. The U.S.S.R. stands for the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and the original party of the Bolsheviks, who would later take over Russia and form the Soviet union, were the Marxist Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (RSDLP). The communists view themselves as a form of socialism, and believe that true Communism is essentially the spread of global socialism, and thus support socialist movements, as communism is a form of socialism, and view communism as the end state of socialism, eventually leading to global socialism, as compared to national socialism, such as with the Nazis or Italian Fascists. Most of the middle eastern dictatorships, be it Syria, Iraq, Libyia, Iran or others were formed with the direct assistance from Moscow, and the same can be said of most South American dictatorships, be it Venezuela, Argentina and so on. Be it their ideology, weapons, equipment, or primary source of funding, these overwhelmingly were not created by the U.S. Contrary to the idea most of the world's problem stems from the U.S. attempts to stop the communists, the simple reality is it of course, was the communists spreading socialist viewpoints over the world that lead to the rish of these dictatorships. While some will argue about the true nature of them being "socialist" or not, a seemingly always evolving, amorphous concept, the simple fact of the matter is it was promoted by the side of self proclaimed socialists, and they at least shared the same names and resources. It's difficult then to suggest the U.S. created all the problems by the very enemies we have fought for decades. The U.S. fought the rise of communism in Vietnam, in Cuba, in Iran, and so on, as well as socialism in Iraq, Libya, and Afghanistan. The central argument that is the basis of the entire anti-war sentiment largely comes from the largely incorrect notion that the U.S. somehow created all of these evil entities, instead of the Soviet Union, who supplied them directly with weapons and funding.
