Afghanistan- Intel reports claimed that terrorists in afganistan where responsible, when the taiban refused to hand over the terrorists, including bin laden. a coalition of nations (US, UK mainly, as well as the northern alliance (afgan anti taliban tribesmen)invaded and overthrew the taliban. The taliban later regrouped, hid along the mountainous pakistan border and counter attacked the coalition troops. hence whats going on now.

Iraq- apparently had WMD'S, the UN weapon inspectors found none, but the US invaded anyway along with the UK and overthrew the regime. Then as a new gov was formed, this caused differences between sunni and shia muslims and they started blowing eachother up. The Americans dealt with this by "the surge"(sending in loads of troops) which reduced violence in general. The Brits felt we were the main target and indirectly casuing violence so trained up an iraq army and handed over control to the iraqis provence by provence.

thats the rough causes of each war and what went on as far as i can renember/ know.

Tl;dr. :-)

Just kidding. Lol. Oh, okay then. Now I understand.

ok im gona sound real stupid when i ask this- but Tl;dr- what do u mean??

Google is your friend! :-O

Tl;dr - Too long, didn't read.

Lawls.

ok thx, next time u ask me to explain something i'll try to keep it to 3 sentences.

or less if i can

Lol. I was just kidding, I just don't feel like reading long things sometimes. x-)

How did we get in a war with both of these places again?

Rich people decided it would be a good idea.

Evidently, that's all they're capable of? x-D

Did any of you se the Frontline documentary: "Bush's War"? Very good and interesting documentary.

The War in Iraq was caused by the grudges of mostly Dick Cheyney and Don Rumsfeld towards Iraq and their skepticism of the CIA's information. Enough to take small and implausible information as the truth, and to shut up all other voices of reason. Thus, this influenced the President's decision to stray from the original goal of hunting Usama and take out all countries and states that possibly harbor terrorism.

The war was started out of grudges, misinformation, and denial from the upper ranks in the White House.

From a less biased point of view, we asked saddam over a dozen times to show us the WMDs and he never answered. He was playing games. Playing games is not what you should do when it concerns nuclear technology. We know Saddam had WMDs in the past. He used them on his own people. He could of used them when he illegally invaded Kuwait and burned much of their oil and stole much of their gold. Now, does Saddam, a brutal murderer of over 200,000 people, seem like the kind of person who would just throw away his nukes? And Im sure none of these hardcore lefties heard, but we did find a nuclear detanator in Iraq (just the detanator portion). So , wtf were they doing with a detanator only? Playing pretend? Wether Iraq had WMDs or not doesnt matter. Taking them out is a win win, because now terrorism lost a big funder.

Thats a new side to the argument Patriot, since since things started getting tough in Iraq, everyone rushed to condemn the invasion in the 1st place.

At the time to me it seemed reasonable that Iraq could have had WMD'S. However if Afghanistan had only recently been secured, i don't think it was tactically wise to rush into another invasion of another country like Iraq, since you are busy also in Afghanistan.This is true especially for Britain, who's army is much smaller than Americas. Obviously an invasion of Iraq would have worried Iran, its on bush's "axis of evil" list ,and with coalition troops in Afghanistan and Iraq its no surprise that Iran is perusing nuclear technology today.