Have you ever watched 'Hotel Rwanda'? What do you think about genocide and how the people getting killed off just want someone to come and protect them because their own government won't/can't?
The case in Rwanda was that no one wanted to get involved despite the killing of almost a million people that weren't doing anything wrong, watch the movie...Do you think our presence in Iraq is similar, to save some of the oppressed..or do you think it was only for the gain of oil?
2006-11-05 03:25:36 · 11 answers · asked by daisy 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Could it be compared to when the Jews were being killed and we intervened?
And I agree the Native Americans did suffer the worse, there was no one to protect them either.
2006-11-05 03:35:13 · update #1
I'm out here in Iraq and trust me... please trust me when i tell you that it's not all the same or to prevent genocide. Keep in mind that most if not all countries were forged by wars. Specially our great U.S. of A. Need less to say that I pray everyday for myself and my brothers and sisters in arms because Sh!t is going to hit the fan once saddam is executed...Once more this is nothing like Hotel Rwanda, nothing all,
2006-11-06 01:41:17 · answer #1 · answered by RICK 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Greetings!
You ask many questions so, 1) it is wrong to think any war is about oil. Everybody seems to gravitate toward that presumption but, the only massive oil market is in the US, it is Americans who make money on it (commodities market) so what would be the motive in killing the goose that lays the golden egg.
Unless the people who buy the gas had a way to revolt and control the price of oil, then oil could not be an issue.
Next, 2) Rwanda is not a good comparison to Iraq. The President did not invade Iraq to quell the killing of innocent people. If he did, when the skirmish began he would not have bombed schools, hospitals, and residential areas. There are some who believe more people have died as a result of Bush, than Hussien.
Also though hard to swallow, The President claims the reason for the invasion was that Iraq was a threat to the US.
3) Genocide. All genocide is wrong. It is always easy to think that we do nothing because we as have ulterior motives, like what you talked about earlier like"oil".
In reaility the problem is the human race as a whole. By nature we are not nice people. Sad but true. We as a race are quick to talk the talk.
Iraq was different only that the President has his own agenda. With all the technology and knowledge is the world it only prooves my point, we have the tools but not the will.
So I guess by where you are born becomes your pre-determined destiny.
Good Luck
2006-11-05 03:51:21 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Rwanda and Iraq have very little in common with eachother. Trying to draw a corralation between the two countries is misleading. Iraq has many things that members of the US government want... OIL, its position in the Middle East and its former leader Saddam Hussein. The US and Iraq have a long and sordid history and the US has a vested interest in the region. Did I mention the OIL yet? As for Rwanda... the country is tiny, poor, has no real exploitable resources of interest to the rest of world and it's a black nation. The UN and its member countries dropped the ball bigtime. The warnings were flowing in from Rwanda and they went unheeded. If you want a hands on account from inside Rwanda read the book Shake Hands With The Devil by Lt. Gen. Romeo Dallaire who was chosen to lead the UN peacekeeping mission.
2006-11-05 03:46:15 · answer #3 · answered by red 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I am not against our 'presence' there, I am against why we are there. The American public was lied to about why we went there to begin with. Rwanda is a very different case. The Iraqi people are being systematically killed off as we speak. Someone said there are more dying now since the U.S. arrival, than when Saddam was there. He was evil and did need to be removed. That's done, so our precious troops, need to come home. But you are right, no one wanted to get involved with Rwanda because there was no benefits in it. no oil, no money, nothing. Just people. It's very sad, to think that, but, what else can one think?
2006-11-05 03:39:46 · answer #4 · answered by pupcake 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
well the problem is that you didn't actually didn't help in Rwanda and they dont have any oil
secondly George W did not invade Iraq to stop a genocide he did it to find WMD , which didn't exist, so no genocide
thirdly yerp Saddam did kill many thousands of his people , but America has killed more, they have less power, less water , less sewerage the economy is destroyed by the USA
the rule of law is broken, if you were an Iraqi didn't dabble in politics and someone broke into your home you could call the police now thanks to the USA you cant
dont change why the USA invaded, it was for one reason only, not genocide , not terroismn, but to find weapons of mass destri\uction, that Iraq didn't have and if they did have never threatened or planned to use on the USA or on Americans
so you have made it far far far worse and allowed oppression to move from a small percentage to most Iraqis , it is amazing the USA hasn't learnt from Vietnam, it is simple dont invade peoples countries, a dictator is bad \but a foreign oppressor is far worse and the worst of all is an incompetent invader as the USA is in Iraq
go home stop killing Iraqis and save your young men, there is no reason to be there
2006-11-05 03:36:52 · answer #5 · answered by mohamed jihad dirka dirka 2 · 4⤊ 2⤋
nope. Our presence in iraq quite isn't doing any important damage to terrorism. it really is because maximum terrorists at the instantaneous are not in iraq, they are in afghanistan, pakistan, and so on. So we are ordinarily leaving them on my own. So why are we in iraq? So, because of this al qaida is getting more suitable, even as we are policing a civil warfare we are not meant to affix. And, al qaida not in any respect operated in iraq, now they achieve this we'eve actual allowed al qaida to spread to a distinct u . s . a .. The terorists in all likelihood attacked us because we'eve been meddling round contained in the Mid east for thus long. Why can we continually attempt this, mess with different countries organisation? both washington and jefferson warned us about entangling ourselves contained in the affairs of different countries. oil earnings and stuff like that would want to come back 2d to nationwide interest and nationwide protection
2016-11-28 19:28:32 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, American soldiers are slaughtering Iraqis with abandon. And reports counting the dead are classified, if not prohibited. My Lai all over again, day after day.
Rapes too, and Abu Ghraib.
No wonder everybody in the world hates the US. Except those who value money over morals, and want to go there to be a part of the rape of the world, and the theft of the world's wealth.
For the few, the very few: the US middle class is disappearing.
2006-11-05 03:33:50 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
that is a good question, but i think it is hard to compare the two events. The Iraqi war was voluntary, the US decided to go in, they did not have to....
I think our presence in Iraq was not to save the people, im not saying it was for oil, but it wasn't for the people. If it was for the people, then we would stayed in Afghanistan to make those people safe first, we left them half done....
2006-11-05 03:29:52 · answer #8 · answered by bbbbb 2 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Genocide is horrific, my people, AMerican Indians suffered the largest genocide in history, our presence in Iraq has/ had nothing to do with genocide. which ought to be a world concern, but an excuse for buly boy Bush to avenge his daddy, as we were attacked mind you by Saudi Arabians, whom he says are our freinds
2006-11-05 03:30:08 · answer #9 · answered by paulisfree2004 6 · 6⤊ 2⤋
I got to watch the movie first (tonite)
2006-11-05 09:21:24 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋