Is it possible to ever really secure Iraq? Serious replies only please.?

Question

Why was there no plan for post-invastion Iraq?
Why does Bush make it sound like the intention from day 1 was was to create an extended process of securing Iraq and establishing Democracy, when there was no talk of this before or during the invasion.
During the invasion it was all about removing Saddam from power and finding weapons of mass destruction. Remember? Part 1 completed, Part 2 confirmed false. Now what? Why are we still there?
Insurgents attack because we are a non-islamic power in the Middle East, and to them, we're a threat to their belief system.
They always do that, and they will keep doing it.
How many people think it is even possible to secure Iraq? And how long will it take, how many dollars, and how many lives? And what happens if 5-10 years later Iraq falls into extremist hands, will we be willing to go back yet again? (sorry about the rant, but I am very interested in serious replies)

Ok I do realize there were some potential weapons of mass destruction, my point was that we never found solid examples of what we were supposed to go there to find. We most just found the "potential" for it.

Thanks for the great answers so far, very interesting, keep them coming!

Answer 1

Allot of Generals in the Pentagon are asking the same question.

Look, it was planned in away that with a Heavy Armor Force, the Republic Guard would be destroyed in 48 hours, and the government would crumble. It took 72 hours, the Iraqi Army was destroyed, but something happened that we didn't plan for, and that was Iraqi soldiers, and some of Saddams supporters taking off their uniforms and blending into the civilian populance. Now, while the Iraqi people are flying the American Flag, and waving at the Americans, a large portion of the military start hiding weapons, ammunition, explosives; whatever they can get their hands on and do nothing but wait. Now Iraq is happy no Saddam, but the thousands of ammunition bunkers are left un-guarded because Mr. Rumsfeld thinks we have a large enough force....but the military is securing Iraq, allot of forces are put on the Iraq/Iran border in case Iran wants to take an advantage of the situation. Now with all that going on, Al Queda takes advantage of infiltrating Iraqi towns and villages, building weapons caches, IEDs are comming in from Iran, freedom fighters come in from the open Iraq-Saudi Arabia border and they just wait. America establishes an interm government, the Shites and Sunnis think its unfair, and oh by the way the Kurds who were slaughtered by Saddam want to be part of the government.
All of a sudden our convoys are being ambushed. Then our convoys are hit with IEDs and being ambushed, then our soldiers are being attacked, while at the same time we are establishing a free and democratic Iraq. Within a year the people are not waving American Flags anymore, there shooting Americans, and Al Quedas plan in starting a civil war to distract the Americans goes into action. In between all that, we train the Iraqi Army, we send experts from defense companies to train Iraqi officers on military tactics, and then we take them on a military operation with us and what happens when the first fire-fight occurs...they run. So the Secretary of Defense wants them all re-trained...on, and on, and on. In addition the US is not prepared with enough body armor, or armored vehicles to protect themselves from IEDs and ambushes..on, and on, and on. Now our soldiers have already been to Iraq 2 times, many are on their 3d tour....not cool.

WMD. No, we didn't find rockets and missile ready to be launched, but we found components that make weapons of mass destruction. And it is 100% correct that Saddam used chemicals against the Kurds.....Chemicals is a weapon of mass destruction.

How long will it take: In my estimate 3 to 5 more years.

How many dollars: don't worry we have the largest gold reserve in the world.

How many lives: No one can answer that

Answer 2

First of all Congress has stated that they did find 500 shells that contained chemical weapons that were suppose to have been destroyed. Just because they are considered old (they have a life span of less than a decade), doesn't mean they can't be recharged (the same way a fire extiguisher is recharged) and the reason they were not recharged is Saddam is no longer in power. He could have recharged them and gave them to our enemies.

Second Muslims from all over the world, especially Africa and Chechnians are coming to Iraq and Afganistan to destroy things. If they aren't fighting in Iraq, they would be fighting elsewhere like Europe. This could make Iraq a hazardous area for awhile as men with money and guns try for power plays to own Iraq. The insurgesnts in Iraq went from being able to raid police HQs in Iraq and Afganistan to being unable to do so. The guys in both areas are going after softer targets in both areas since they no longer have the extreme firepower to pull off major raids anymore. I think those types of guys will always be around as they are in all parts of the world.

Answer 3

Politics aside. Yes it is possible to secure Iraq. Can it be done with the number of soldier currently employed in the region? No.

If you look back at Desert Storm, over 500,000 soldiers were used to invade Iraq. At the time it was recognised that even a force of this size was insufficent to act as an occupying force. The civilian leadership's decision to attempt an occupation with less than half that number, despite objections from military leadership, was poorly thought out. The only way that stabilization can be achieved at this point would be to put more effort and resources into rebuilding the Iraqi military. This would allievate the issues with manpower. Additionaly an indiginous military force would be more accepted by the populace.

Answer 4

i can tell from your details that you love CNN. 'During the invasion it was all about removing Saddam from power and finding weapons of mass destruction' i assume you "it" is the news media. of course that's all you heard, they were telling you want you wanted to hear.

we did find some wmd's, but more important, is the fact that we found evidence that weapons development and manufacturing plants were stripped out and moved somewhere. perhaps Syria? hell, we gave them a 14 month notice that we were going to invade. remember?

about your question. Islam is the problem. all and i mean all Muslim leaders teach hate for Jews, hate for Christians, better yet, hate for anyone who is not a Muslim. there are peaceful Muslims, but they are all filled with hate. you cant have democracy in a world of hate, it wont work.

Answer 5

I think that it is possible to secure Iraq but not possible the way we are going about it.

We need to understand that Islam will not bend to our wills. So we have to break it. Pure and simple. This IS a religious war and Im not afraid to say it. IF you see it for anything else then you are misguided. Islam is attempting (successfully) to dominate the earth. They are doing it through the battlefield and through the court system (Thanks ACLU). Multiculturism is going to be the end of society as we know it.

Answer 6

there were WMD found in Iraq. Just not "the ones we were looking for", as liberals love to point out, as if that makes them less dangerous, or less of a violation.

Yes, the majority of the Iraqi's are working to secure the country from the fundamentalists. Over time, as children are educated, it will become more and more peacefull.

Answer 7

No i dont think it is ever possible, there are going to be Iraquis that are going to hate us for going into their country and teach thier kids that hate and so on and we will have to keep dealing with that... so we have that to look forward to

Answer 8

Well, we still have Soldiers in the Balkans, so will we ever restore security...? Who knows, probably not.

Answer 9

of course not the us is messisng with a hopeless cause and bush is a dumbass

Answer 10

we can only help