What did the USA achieve in Iraq???

Question

I think it was better when Sadam was in power.
USA killed in a year more then sadam lilled in 30 years.
He must be ranking like, # 1 Staline, pol pot, Hitler, sharon , Bush jrand so on...

Answer 1

you are so goddamn right.. they did totally nothing but destruction and more terrorism

Answer 2

We have turned the country into 3 regions, the peacefull Kurdish North, The Iranian controlled Shia south and the Sunni Central region that is now in an internal Civil war.

We liberated the Kurds, (but that was in the 1991 war), We unleashed islamic fundementalism into the Shia south, so that a harsh form of Sharia law is visciously enforced, and women oppressed and raped far more than before. Crime has exploded.

In the Sunni heartlands, ectarian violence is almost unimaginable. There is no single working form of Government, and instead of 1 bloodthirsty tyranical dictator we have many.

Oil is pumping out of the country, but at a slower rate than under saddams restricted 'oil for food' regime.

over three years since the invasion and electricity, water, fuel availity are worse now than under Saddam's regime.

The Marine's that may have replied here cannot accept that they could have caused this, well they are brainwashed to believe that they are the best (they are not) that they are the good guys, (they aren't in this case) and that they were there to help (they made a bolloxed up job of it then!) The marines need to have a congruent asoociation between what they did in Iraq and their personal and group identity of being 'good guys' so they deny that what they have done there is wrong. There have been many marines and other soldiers return from Iraq and realise what they did there was wrong. That the mission was wrong and was based on blatant lies. after this many of them have committed suicide out of guilt.

When the majority of Iraqis believe that they where better off under Saddam Hussien, I think that they probably were.

Rating Bush in the same league as Stalin or Hitler is WAY wide of the mark however,Hitler killed some 9 million, Stalin killed over 11 million people, Bush is nowhere near that many.

That said he still has time to catch them up. Hitler came to power in Germany in 1933, when he had been in power for 6 years (1939) he hadn't actually killed that many people by then. His worst most evil period was still ahead. GW Bush has been in power for 6 years and the parralels between the Democratic germany of 1933 and what developed, and the USA these days are frightening.

The Reichstag fire - 911. The enabling act and the Patriot Act. The SS and the Office of Homeland Security.

Be careful, USA!

Answer 3

All these deaths should be added to the deaths from the First Gulf War and the hundreds of thousands that died as a result of 12 years of sanctions. The main reason for Americas presence is two-fold, obviously protecting the West's oil supplies, secondly maintaining a firm grip on a strategically important yet volatile area of the world.

The British and Americans have controlled the region since the the end of the First World War with a mixture of brute force, political iterference in the domestic politics of individual countries, by setting up a policeman state called Israel, by bribery and corruption and by using the old maxim divide and rule.

With this bloody, cynical and often ineptly executed strategy the entire region has been thrown into perpetual chaos. Tyranny, oppression and warfare are the ingredients in the glue that maintains this unsatisfactory status quo.

For ordinary people everwhere the recent stepping up of the fabricated War on Terror and the malignant interference in Iraq and elsewhere have achieved nothing except to make the world a more dangerous and divided place. Right now the world is on the brink of a new era. If things continue like this we can all forget our human rights, the Geneva convention, liberty. Our leaders and the money men they represent are frightened. Frightened by an impending energy crisis, frightened at their relative economic stagnation, frightened of the rising powers in the East - China and India. As the various nations jockey for position and influence in this changing world climate we can expect more attacks on our rights, more scaremongering, more cut-backs and more wars like Iraq.

To quote Yeats:

Things fall apart, the centre cannot hold
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood dimmed tide is loosed
And everywhere the ceremonies of innocence are drowned
The best lack all conviction whilst the worst are full of passionate intensity...
And what rough beast, it's hour come round at last, slouches toward Bethlehem to be born?

Answer 4

I am amazed at the stupidity of my countrymen here. You think it was better when Sadam was in power? And look how many extremely uninformed people agree with you. I say hit the road. Move on over to the Middle East and try like hell to live one day with that government. I double dog dare you. With that idiotic mindset and mouthy-ness - none of you would last a half an hour. Have you any idea what Sadam did while in power? Any idea how he tortured his own people? No. Of course not. You are oblivious. It's almost incomprehensible the ignorance of some of our countrymen. I blame the liberal to a fault media though. But until you see first hand - reserve judgment. You may find in your tiny little closed mind the truth one day...but you'll have to open your eyes and your mind to get it done. Good luck. And God Bless America.

Answer 5

Not much. In fact he has destroyed almost of all the infratstructure. People dont have the basic necessities like water, electricity.

All said and done when Saddam was in power, not one terrorist could come into the country. Now the country is overrun with terrorists who blow up innocent iraqis and the country is on the verge of Civil War.

In short, Bush has screwed up Iraq totally for his own personal gains and to satisfy his stupid ego.

Answer 6

that's been shown that a protection stress victory by technique of US troops everywhere isn't a possibility as long as there's a Dumbocratic get at the same time round to circumvent on and on how we cant win a conflict with actually each individual and shrink off funding to make it happen. (that's what befell with Viet Nam) The Dumbocrat get at the same time of on the prompt has little to no resemblance to the Democrat get at the same time of sixty years in the previous. If the properly-loved-day Dumbocrats were round then, lets all be talking German or jap and there wouldnt be any Jewish people round. (for you liberal arts majors accessible, it truly is a witty way of holding lets have lost international conflict 2) pondering that you (alongside with Sean Penn, and the distinctive hollywoodiots who've by no skill been there or were wined and dined by technique of SoDamn Insane) are such an authority on Iraq, how are you going to describe why 16 provinces out of eighteen are non violent and taking off to prosoper? you imagine of we'd want to continually in uncomplicated words run abode and enable them to get pulled into the chaos that could stick with and get one thousand's of people killed? i theory you libs were such international thinkers and function been so in contact about rather each individual everywhere. guess that doesnt comprise Iraqi voters.

Answer 7

The official story on Iraq has never made sense. The connection that the Bush administration has tried to draw between Iraq and al-Qaida has always seemed contrived and artificial. In fact, it was hard to believe that smart people in the Bush administration would start a major war based on such flimsy evidence.
The pieces just didn't fit. Something else had to be going on; something was missing.

In recent days, those missing pieces have finally begun to fall into place. As it turns out, this is not really about Iraq. It is not about weapons of mass destruction, or terrorism, or Saddam, or U.N. resolutions.

This war, is intended to mark the official emergence of the United States as a full-fledged global empire, seizing sole responsibility and authority as planetary policeman. It would be the culmination of a plan 10 years or more in the making, carried out by those who believe the United States must seize the opportunity for global domination, even if it means becoming the "American imperialists" that our enemies always claimed we were.

Once that is understood, other mysteries solve themselves. For example, why does the administration seem unconcerned about an exit strategy from Iraq once Saddam is toppled?

Answer 8

"The iraq war has failed to serve a single major US foreign policy objective. It has not made the United States safer, it has not advanced the war on terror; it has not made Iraq a stable state; it has not spread democracy to the Middle East; it has not enhanced US access to oil"
Many thoughtful American Soldiers have been saying over the past 18 months that they did not think Iraq was sustainable as a unitary state,and, therefore, that they are fighting for an unattainable objective.
The US/UK war is a strategic error basically.

Answer 9

The right wingers achieved most of what they were after in Iraq:

- They got Bush elected in 2004.
- They got their tax cuts.
- They turned "support our troops" into an incredibly successful campaign slogan.
- They funneled huge amounts of tax money to a handful of businesses run by their best supporters, in the process propping up enough of the economy to keep some good numbers coming in.
- They reinforced their already successful use of terrorism as a campaign strategy.

From the right-wingers' point of view, the biggest failure related to Iraq was their failure to leverage it into a privitization of Social Security.

However, unlike the right-wingers, the United States didn't achieve a damned thing in Iraq, and of course we paid dearly for what the right-wingers got.

Answer 10

Saddam had rape and torture rooms. Saddam executed over 300000 people and buried them in mass graves. anyone that disagreed with him or posted a question like you just did would have been beaten and shot or they would shoot their family. Iraqis risked their lives to go out and vote. they showed that they voted by dipping their fingers in blue ink even though they may have been shot. would you do that? the ones that are blowing themselves up and killing Iraqis now are terrorists. why do you think they are doing it? do you think they are trying to break the will of the people? lucky for us they are not narrow minded and weak like you.

Answer 11

Maybe you should visit Iraq before you voice your unimformed opinion. I spent 7 months in the Corps over there. And HELL NO they weren't better off with Saddam.

Looks like another 13 year old trying to act like a grown up by shooting thier mouth off about something they have no comprehension of.