About the Iraq war?

Question

I'm not trying to start an argument of opinions here, I just would like to hear your thoughts. Are we helping, or making the situation worse in Iraq? President Bush says it would be disastrous to leave now. Do you agree?

And please, no president-bashing. This isn't the purpose of my question.

Answer 1

Before the president even mentioned how horrible it would be to leave now, i knew it was true.

I have friends and family who risk and have lost their lives for the sake of the iraqi people. Leaving before finishing would be calling their lives and deaths worthless.

Something iam not prepared to do.

Besides that, i believe we have done the Iraqi people a service. I have friends who moved here from Iraq some years ago, and while they resent american occupation of their country, they do appreciate knowing that their loved ones have a chance at a democratic life and government.

Also, my friends in Iraq have told us many times that what we hear on the news just isnt the same as what happens over there. They very rarely have anything major happening, since most things in the news are repeated over and over until there is something new to report. In fact, they say that many civilians are friendly towards them, and thank them on occasion for protecting them.

So yes, i do support the war, but most of all i support the cause that our troops are fighting for. Theyre not without meaning.

Answer 2

Seems clear to me: the country is divided into three parts so there is no sovereignty anymore. Iraq is slipping into a civil war. The Kurds want their own state, the Shiites want to rule the south and the Sunnites the central part. Problem is that the Sunnites don't have natural resources anymore, or oil fields, these are either in the south or in the north. This means that they will never settle with a division of the country. Of course, underlying is the religious dispute between Sunnites and Shiites, the clashes and the longing for vengeance against the Sunnites who ruled under Saddam and committed horrors.

Of course it is disastrous to leave Iraq right now but the Americans have not contributed to a stable situation, on the contrary and that's an understatement, with a fake government at the head of a devastated country, and they call it freedom and democracy. I have never seen a population as divided as the Iraqis right now. America wanted to get rid of Saddam because of weapons of mass destruction and liberate the country. Well, Saddam is gone and look at the country -100 dead per day at least. The Iraqis should have gotten rid of Saddam in their own time at their own pace, even if it would have taken another hundred years.

Answer 3

The situation is rapidly deteriorating into civil war. This is what happens when an administration uses simple solutions for complex problems. We have open up a Pandora's Box and we can't close it up again. In the void we have created Iran is moving in with increasing influence and resources. A world where we have an Iraq closely allied with a ruler dedicated to the destruction of Israel is a far worse situation than the one that was there before we invaded. Iraq has become a recruiting poster for Islamic extremists everywhere. We have committed too much prestige, time, lives and money to pull out without it looking like defeat. This administration has painted us into a corner.

Answer 4

Taking Saddam out of power was good but it also had setbacks. The Shiites and Sunnis are like the Catholics and Protestants in Ireland - they don't like each other and feel they are better than one another. Saddam did not allow them to just fight in the streets like they are starting to do now and I don't think our military or any peace keeping forces has the ability and know-how to stop an impending civil war.
It works both ways. It would be a disaster to leave but it is going to be a disaster to stay also.
Really, there is no feasible way to leave that will be good. We could go fast but that would leave the last troops there open to attack and possible annihilation. We could go slow while waiting for a peace-keeping force to take our place but that would mean we'd be over there longer while they became en-placed + we would probably have to show them how to do things before leaving.

I personally think W. could learn a few things from his father about pulling troops out of Iraq. How to do it so that each unit is guarding the other against attack while they are pulling back. It seems the first war in the early 90's went very smooth from start to finish - possibly due to the fact that the military was more highly trained (in general and in deploying) and that much of the upper echelon had been in Vietnam and had the experience of having to pull out of a country.

Answer 5

I truly don't think we're "helping" but I do agree that if we were to leave now, it would be disastrous. We might as well put a little polish on that mess.

I don't think we're justified being in Iraq. Yeah, Saddam is an ***, but what we're doing there is not "right" either.

I support our troops and recognize that our president is who he is. I'm not into Bush-bashing. I just wish we'd gone in there with a definite EDUCATED plan. But since we didn't... or it doesn't SEEM like we did... And our men and women are still out in the field, I pray and lend my support.

I pray for the Iraqi's as well as the Americans.

Answer 6

Yes, if we leave Iraq now it would be disastorous. Iraq's government is not that strong yet, and the Iaqi military only has full control of one providence. If we were to pull out, it would leave a power vacuum. The is already fighting bordering on a civil war, but if the US left, Iran would easily be able to give aid to their side, and Iraq would fall under Iranian influence. If that happens, everything we did (whether or not you agree with it) and lost would be in vain.

Right now, the Iraqi forces have full control over one providence and they are close to gaining control of several more. Last time I checked, the Iraqis only had one brigade capable of operating independently of US forces. The rest are making progress. We just need to bide our time until the rest of the forces are ready to operate on their own. At that time, the US needs adopt a reactionary posture (which could include a force drawdown, not a pullout), where the Iraqis do their own security and the US helps units on major operations.

Answer 7

If the United States just ups and leaves, another Saddam-like character can just take over where Saddam left off. The United States just needs to wrap it up putting the government together which is def going to take a lot of time. So yes I do agree because if we leave in another so many years the US or another country would have to intervene and get rid of the tyrannical leader that would step into power. However, the longer we stay over in Iraq, the most hostility is brewing and soldiers lives are lost. Hopefully Iraqis will see that the US is trying to help their country get back on their feet.

Answer 8

In the long run we may help, but our reasons that were given to us by our president were lies. And are we helping right now? the answer is no, they are converging on civil war. Perhaps they need a dictator, cause one thing Saddam did do, is control sectarian violence, nobody messed with him, they were all too afraid, a dictator might still be right for that country, obviously not someone like Saddam though.

Answer 9

Worse. The country is in civil war thousands will die in it. Terrorists are being recruited at a high rate. There people are being broken off into factions. We created a war in iraq that will last for years. We put a government in place that is not supported or represtitive of much of the population.

Answer 10

I'll probably be the only one who doesn't get into bashing the president, or someone, on this question.

I believe it would make it worse if we were to leave now, and I do believe the vast majority of Iraqis are better off than they were. You wouldn't know it by the stories the media chooses to make public (highlighting "bad", ignoring "good" stories every day). I have several acquaintances that have returned from duty, and they are appalled at the coverage given. They all saw tremendous amounts of good actions and stories, and never saw any make the news. Al Jazeera, I understand not showing anything positive, but CNN? ABC? What gives? Do they hate this country that much that they choose to be an extension of Al Jazeera instead of reporting anything that could be construed as positive?