English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Im an Australian and from all the news it seems that after the war in Iraq, everyone is on edge more, terrorists making more threats, and nothing has improved atall except make life hell for the US, The Brits, the Spanish, the Japs and us Aussies?

(Normally we dont go to war unless our country is immediately in danger, or the brits are, har har. But is this a US Foreign Policy disaster and did it just drag every1 else down with it?)

2006-09-16 06:22:25 · 29 answers · asked by Paul S 1 in Politics & Government Military

Im an Australian and from all the news it seems that after the war in Iraq, everyone is on edge more, terrorists making more threats, and nothing has improved atall except make life hell for the US, The Brits, the Spanish, the Japs and us Aussies?

(Normally we dont go to war unless our country is immediately in danger, or the brits are, har har. But is this a US Foreign Policy disaster and did it just drag every1 else down with it?)

Edit: Its not whether they did it in the best interest of them/the world, but did it actually accomplish anything?

2006-09-16 06:28:30 · update #1

Edit 2: I am a real australian, i dont intend on surrendering. Its just from the information ive recieved, it doesnt look like it has helped us, or you either.

2006-09-16 06:36:17 · update #2

Last Edit: Thanks alot, this has been very enlightening, but i have to ask another question to get the whole truth.

2006-09-16 06:39:45 · update #3

Dammit, last edit, i should have a reply:
In response to olatunji o, Howard is an idiot, and in Australia he is regarded as Bush's Sheriff in Asia. And as such, the majority of the population opposed the war, but would still go along with it since it was in the best interest of the iraqi people.

And we went because of the ANZUS Treaty, and we cant break that treaty otherwise then Indonesia and Korea will come knocking at our doorstep and were all alone

2006-09-16 06:59:32 · update #4

29 answers

No, actually the opposite. The whole World is now a much safer place. That's why we are there.

You see, our Country was attacked 4 times during the Clinton administration ... but he had other 'priorities' on the brain and IGNORED the attacks. This allowed the terrorist to plan the attack of 9-11 .. but they forgot that Bush would be in office at the time and he would not ignore such an attack on the US.

The days of sitting around hugging and kissing the terrorists are OVER. and I am so glad!

2006-09-16 06:24:06 · answer #1 · answered by ValleyR 7 · 3 3

Nah, Thomas Jefferson complained about the violent Muslims. Just look at the church bombings after the Pope's remarks. If you remember the '70s you'd see all the hostage takings that happened by Muslim terrorists.

It's a misnomer that it's making hell for everyone. U.S. troops are getting combat pay which is like a 50% raise and military combat increases the chance of promotion. The death rate is UNDER the U.S. national average and over a third were from accidents that could have happened in the U.S. Sure it's hot, but people live in Texas and Arizona where it's that hot. The Iraqis also have to live in the heat.

The only thing it's doing is killing all those gangs with their bombs and grenade launchers. They will run out of weapons.

2006-09-16 06:35:18 · answer #2 · answered by gregory_dittman 7 · 0 0

It is a tense historical period all over the globe, for many other reasons that this incident has only energized . Had we not undermined the UN there probably would have been some true benefit from military action, but being devious about our intentions was totally ignoble. As it stands, the whole world either thinks that we're being led by a liar, a buffoon, or both, and that means that we're practically asking to be attacked for decades to come.

-- or --

posted to this page:
"nope, the world is the same but a lot less Iraqis are being killed and tortured"

You're right. Now they're Iranians, and we're pushing to legalize specific forms of it.

2006-09-16 08:45:03 · answer #3 · answered by Em 5 · 0 0

I can't believe some of the answers here. How can any intelligent person think Bush is doing a great job by sending our troops to Iraq? The whole 9/11 thing was a fake to get us into war. Bush is personally responsible for the death of 300 innocent lives of 9/11 and also 2500 soldiers lives and many thousands more wounded for the sake of oil and big business. The man should be impeached and hung for crimes against humanity. Time will prove what a bad president he has been.

2006-09-16 06:31:13 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

Oh sure. It was probable the worst thing we could have done.
We had a right wing coup d'etat and Bush fronts for a junta that wanted to reshape the Middle East into something better for the US long term vested interests. Only it went wrong.

This may well shape the course of world politics through the whole 21st Centruy.

2006-09-16 06:36:24 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I think it was the worst thing that Bush, s invasion of Iraq has happened, because as you say it has caused so much fear, chaos, and confusion, it's now very frightening to go anywhere in the world, so many soldiers and civilians are being killed daily, you don't have to read horror stories, just watch the news, and yes it has had a terrible effect on the world, and brought so many countries into fear of terrorism, and yes it is a disaster.

2006-09-16 06:34:04 · answer #6 · answered by katiessupernan 2 · 0 0

appropriate now, it would be impossible. We have already got many human beings controlling Bush, and our rules. yet, we do merely not understand who those human beings are. there are a number of bankers, deepest lobbyists, firms, and different earning salary off the Iraq profession. they don't pick the protection rigidity to circulate away, via fact those human beings pick to end off development bases, controlling key oil fields, making a lot of money from the protection rigidity business complicated, and etc. additionally, human beings are destroying the dollar's value by ability of spending it distant places. pick a answer to alter into as quickly as returned a enjoyed u . s . a . international? Withdraw all international bases, return troops from Iraq/Afghanistan, halt all distant places spending, cut back the quantity of government so corruption, greed, and all company lobbyists will lose skill, and finally we are going to have the government off of our backs. ultimately, yet not least, sell loose commerce, and international family members international, not in hassle-free terms conflict. we ought to uphold our shape as quickly as returned, it became the only rfile that made the government powerless and non-secretive. We had greater skill, yet daily, the government will administration in hassle-free terms greater persons. great question.

2016-10-15 01:42:22 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

You pegged that nail on the head. We haven't really been all that effective and basically stirred up a hornet's nest. Yeah we can take out the occasional high ranking terrorist member, but they are a dime a dozen. Republicans do like to use the terrorist threat to pump themselves up during the election period though. (The sky is falling! The sky is falling! Terrorists everywhere! Condition red!)

2006-09-16 06:43:29 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Our biggest threat to the United States is President Bush himself.
He has turn the whole world against us.No where is it safe for an American to travel anymore. He has made his hell and expects all
of us to go along with him.He is nothing but a cheap piece of junk,a murderer,a thief,a liar. I would not put it pass him to be the first to start an ATOMIC WAR if he feels he is not winning the war. What scares me even more is the fact he could be the one to drop it on us (US Citizens) if he feels we are on to his tricks. He is a MADMAN!

2006-09-19 08:36:40 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Was it the invasion of Iraq that made the world a more dangerous place, or was it the lack of response to the rise of militant Islam by the previous administration that led to their becoming more agressive, requiring a response from the western world?

Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

2006-09-16 06:44:50 · answer #10 · answered by Dave_Stark 7 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers