The war was started because the President made use of his power to attack preemptively. In orther words, he went after both the established power base and associated terrorists before they were able to attack the U.S. directly. Yes, WMD was a part of the supposed threat, but not the only part. Regardless of how the politicians in Washington try to represent their feelings on the war, it happened with the support of congress.
Was he completely justified in his decision? It's arguable. I do believe the President was sincere in his convictions. But I think he is too naive in listening to the senior military advisors... they're not educated enough on the real world realities that exist in the streets of Baghdad, as they only see the inside of conference rooms.
I used to believe in the reason for the war... before I arrived here. I've been here almost a year, and now I would have to say that after seeing things first hand.... there's no way we or anybody else can ever give the Iraqis a spirit they don't possess and fight for themselves. We give them a base, they take it apart and sell all the parts. They rip the copper wiring out of the buildings and go sell it. It's disheartening. Anybody that tells you that the majority of Iraqis feel differently is not telling you the truth. Yes, they all hated the former leadership, but they don't have any convictions or enough of them to ever come close to what Americans are made out of in wanting self-rule.
When I first came here, I was full of ultra-conservative ideals. No more. I no longer support unchecked military spending. I see how the money gets spent. It gets spent on a bunch of $50,000 SUV's so field grade officers who never leave the wire have a nice ride from their air-conditioned office to the dining facility. It's gross to see how money is spent. Our motor pool just put in a new marble floor: your tax dollars at work.
And I don't think the war can ever be "won." Yes, we can keep enough forces here to make very slow progress and keep things as a stalemate... but that's about it. I can see us being able to reduce the troop levels, but never send them home. The minute we leave, chaos will errupt because, quite honestly, most Iraqis really don't give a crap who is in power. They just don't. They just don't want to be blown up anymore. And that's not enough to create and define a democracy.
2006-08-18 04:16:11
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
First, it's a WAR. There are people who don't want to see Democracy succeed. They don't have major military powers so they do what they can. They blow up people. Hezbollah is a group started by IRAN. They too don't want to see Democracy succeed. The problem is that we as a country are so tied up trying to be "nice and correct" about all of this that we will end up losing at our own hand. There are people who hate you and me for no other reason than the lifestyle we have. They are going to do whatever they can to make our lives miserable. This will not end in any of our lives nor our childrens lives. It's a good idea to know what this is about so you won't be so surprised when bad things happen.
2006-08-17 23:54:39
·
answer #2
·
answered by RedC. 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
i for my area experience Bush had a number of issues on his time table to achieve interior the IRAQ conflict. First it became to get revenge on Saddam for particularly a lot killing his father, the first George Bush. next, i imagine after 9/11, Bush had to verify a community in which he might want to strive against the terrorist and all might want to flock to instead of heading into the U. S. right away. That way, in case you've been a terrorist, you would flow to IRAQ instead people position of starting place, cuz' it truly is a lot less puzzling to attack American pursuits and troops. yet another reason became to wish to create like a democratic authorities there the position this may be the first and all Arabic governements there might want to seem to adhere to. Create like a domino impression or something. those are the justifications i trust why we are in IRAQ. even if, I do imagine we ought to continually have by no ability invaded IRAQ, i imagine shall we've continued containing Saddam like we did and he did not actually have the chemical guns we theory he had. it truly is worst now, back then Bush had a decision, shop Saddam, the devil, or now face with a sparkling devil. The terrorist & Iranians.
2016-11-05 02:07:00
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Civil war. It happened something we all knew it will happen when USA decided to go to Iraq. Muslim are not united, Shiites fight against Sunnites. Then Kurds also live in Iraq and they also don't like both of them. So, Husein had strong and hard leadership, but as you can see they need that. Now they fight among themselves for the power in Iraq. As you can see, they don't want the democracy which USA tried to import to them. They don't want to live in American way.
2006-08-17 23:59:36
·
answer #4
·
answered by nelli 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
chaos, becoz of bush.
Although capturing saddam was good, but staying there so long is only a proof that bush didnt want spreading democracy and freedom .... it was for political gains....
2006-08-18 02:46:56
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋