So much talk against the Iraq war. Do we not value stopping tyranny,establishing democracy, the time it takes?

Question

We have a commitment to other people of the world to give them a life of freedom if we can, even if it takes such honrable sacrifice. Isn't it short-sighted to not value that, and provide to others the possibility of the type of life we enjoy in America?
Is it just popular to disagree with our leaders?
I believe if I were an Iraqi I would be deeply grateful for the changes that are happening there; that were only a dream 10 years ago. Especially for a better life for my children.

Answer 1

I take your point, you think that some folks are using unpopularity of the Iraq war as a cover for not wanting to do anything at all. I think all these histrionics against the government ( supported by much of the media) is a dangerous thing and a threat to democracy,long term.

We elect politicians to represent us, and a show of loyalty is even more important in international affairs. Are the media trying to set up an alternative government by stirring up every joe on the street, to give his opinion about whatever issue comes up.

Too much dissent and too much democracy is not a good thing, sounds too left wing to me.

Answer 2

We didn't invade Iraq to stop tyranny, or establish democracy. We invaded Iraq because, according to our administration, Iraq was in possession of weapons of mass destruction, was on the verge of obtaining nuclear weapons, and was a grave and urgent threat to the Untied States and the rest of the world. Turns out all of that was a lie. The administration cherry picked data...that is, played up the intelligence that made the case for war, and ignored the intelligence that proved otherwise. The plan was to invade Iraq and establish a US friendly government so the US could have a strong military influence on the middle east. You don't have to believe me though, look on the NeoCon web site: www.newamericancentury.org. Read the white papers that were submitted to President Clinton, urging him to use any force necessary to overthrow Saddam. Most of that think-tank became members of the Bush administration.....still wonder why we are in Iraq now?

By the way, there are a lot worse tyrants out there right now, at this moment. There's a crazy little tyrant in North Korea who actually does possess WMDs. Why aren't we "spreading democracy" there yet?

Answer 3

If we Americans possess some inherent committment to liberate all the peoples of the world currently under tyrannical rule, we will find ourselves engaged in perpetual war. That is a ridiculous proposition. That is the neo-con thesis. The only tyrannies that we should go to war against are those which violate us or our democratic allies. Whether or not Iraq threatened us is obviously questionable. I feel the war against Iraq was premature as we did not institute every single peaceful means of gaining Iraq's compliance with disarmament - namely, we did not institute an oil embargo and therefore Iraq was not given the ultimate reason to comply, and thus they did not. Now , thousands of Americans and Iraqis are dead. Violence should be the final option for gaining compliance and Bush and the neocons did not allow it to be so. Of course, now that we're there, I am for finishing the job because we cannot leave the land in chaos where terrorists as bad as Bin Laden and Zarqawi will breed. Our politicians do not want to set a time-table, but if the Iraqi leadership does, we should abide by it. It is their country and should it fall into chaos because of our pulling out according to their time-table, the blood and chaos is on their hands - not ours.

Answer 4

yes.
I agree, we should spread democracy everywhere, next iran, then china, then north Korea, cuba, egypt, Sudia Arabia, we should not wait either, if we have time should look into that darfur thing........

it should not matter how much blood we spill, if it means other countries can enjoy the "type of life we enjoy"


I am glad we went to war to give them democracy, I can't imagine why it is popular to disagree with our leaders, it is not like they suggested there were nuclear weapons there, i don't see what the fuss is about.


I am sure that the iraqi people are greatful, and those that survive the civil war will also celebrate the fourth of July and Barbaque.

The Iraqi children probably don't even think about that shock and awe campaing there probably too busy thinking about toys, or tv, or britnney spears, or even where there next meal is coming from, than to concern themselves with the past, let bygones be bygones i say...


Everyone wants nation building, thats what i check off in the box when i pay my taxes, people are soo very very short sighted, they cant envision a world where everyone is american....won't that be nice.

Answer 5

What commitment? These people over there don't want the life we enjoy in America. They would find it overindulgent, and against everything they believe in. The Constitution and Declaration of Independence give us the RIGHT to disagree with our leaders. Do you think we would be in Iraq if it were not for oil? Or in any war that didn't benefit us financially for that matter. WAR IS BUSINESS. We couldn't find Osama Bin Laden so we figured hey what the heck let's go after Saddam, it's been awhile. Saddam was a good guy when Reagan armed him, a bad guy when Bush's daddy made war on him, a good guy when Cheney did business with him, and a bad guy when Bush needed a "we can't find Bin Laden" diversion.
What about our poor troops over there. Over 2000 dead. Bring them home and send Bush over there. He needs to know what it's like to be in a war anyway, considering he never was in one.

Answer 6

Some Americans do. A lot of americans don't. They have become lazy and too concerned with their own comfort. They don't care what happens to those around them. They have bought into the liberal mentality that Americans are evil and the scurge of the world. They have bought into the liberal mentality that you don't fight for anything. That you should sit back and take whatever is thrown at you and that you don't say a word about it much less lift a hand to stop it.

soubassakis - if the implication is that we are responsible for creating the cituation, then we are held that much more responsible for putting a stop to it.

Answer 7

My friend, the problems we face trying to establish democracy in other countries arise from our own leaders images of being two-faced.

Too many people overseas don't trust our motives because out own government doesn't always practice what it preaches. It's that simple.

In one middle-eastern country we claim we want to spread democracy while al the same time our president has close family ties the dictatorship in Saudi Arabia and strong business ties with the dictator run government in Angolia.

See the problems we face? It's simple mistrust of our motives.

Answer 8

your argument is somewhat valid, however stopping tyranny was not the reason we went. President Bush and his administration claimed that Saddam had WMDs and the potential to use them. We still have yet to find these WMDs. I don't support tyranny and i'm not against democracy, but perhaps Iraqis don't want democracy.

Answer 9

America greatly contributed to the situation in Iraq then wants to save them from the situation they bankrolled


how grateful would you be?

maybe the next war should be on American soil.
maybe you should look at the history of America and what it really does achieve ...its not really a great deal,you can spin it anyway you like but facts show otherwise.

Answer 10

its no longer incorrect to question your authorities allthough that is faulty to adhere to them blindly. thanx for having the balls to face up for what you've faith, if in straight forward words extra human beings would take time to imagine for themselves. I actually have continually beloved "nuclear fingers cant supply hugs" yet that doesnt extremely pass with the iraq conflict yet experience free to apply it later. how bout "blood is thicker than oil" or "a real patriot knows even as to decline" and then have the conflict with the circle and the line by it on the different part. no longer something receives the point for the length of extra efficient than a good old fasioned peace signal. sorry i couldnt be of extra help yet good success.