War in Iraq?

Question

As everyone knows, the war in iraq has resulted in many many many deaths- were they all unnecessary? Whose fault is it? Who should be punished- What is your stance on the entire isuue?

Answer 1

There was never any connection between Al Qaeda and Iraq. There is now, of course, and Bush/Blair are to blame for that.

Very few people blamed the Americans for going into Afghanistan following 9/11. I certainly didn't. I'd have done the same.

But where did Iraq come into it? Saddam, hideous monster that he is, had nothing to do with 9/11. I can't understand it when people fail to distinguish between the need to get rid of the people who caused 9/11 (Al Quaeda, Taliban) and Iraq.

Bush and Blair went into Iraq for one reason only - oil. Bush and his cronies are all people who have made and are making a lot of money out of oil.

Look at it this way: if they wanted to attack a nasty dictatorship whose human rights record is appalling, why not North Korea? Or China?

Of course Bush/Blair can't be blamed DIRECTLY for all the deaths in Iraq. The Iraqis are doing a damned good job of murdering their fellow countrymen. But it was Bush/Blair who kicked the whole thing off, invading the country and destroying its infrastructure and institutions without giving any thought as to what would happen next.

They should have stayed in Afghanistan, sorted out the mess, provided humanitarian aid, got the bulk of the Afghan people on their side by showing they were prepared to make the effort and spend money on reconstruction.

Instead we're fighting on 2 fronts. Service personnel are being killed every day. And so are many many innocent men, women and children.

I'd have a much better opinion of our leaders if they at least admitted that they've made grave mistakes, and were honest with us for a change.

If any service personnel or their families read this - please do not take offence. I know you are all doing a horrible, difficult job, and most of you are doing it in as decent and honourable a way as you can.

Many of my family members were killed or wounded in WW2. I know what it is like to grow up in a family scarred by the effects of war. But at least we had the consolation of knowing that the sacrifices our family made helped to defeat the Nazis and make the world a better place.

But Iraq was a mistake. People lied to take us to war in Iraq (are you out there Alistair Campbell?). Bush /Blair owe these service families an honest admission of their mistakes and a clear statement of how they plan to get us out of the mess they have created.

But we've blown it for sure in the middle east. How can we ever expect any nation there to trust us again? How can we ever regain the trust and respect of the Iraqi people? Don't think we can.

Sorry. This has turned into a bit of a rant. It's something I feel very strongly about.

Answer 2

Against the Iraq War but since we started it we need to finish it. Of course there is the possibility that with Saddam in power we would have eventually had to go to war at some point. Who knows? I just think the money could have been better spent in the USA on domestic energy development. Mind you, I'm not some idiot who is blindly anti-War or anti-military. Until everyone in the world ceases to be aggressive there will always be a need for a military. As long as countries compete for land and resources there will be war. People who campaign to end all wars or get rid of the military are living in a dreamworld.

Answer 3

First of all, the US & UK had no compelling reason to invade Iraq again. There were no WMDs. The "intelligence reports" were faked. There is no connection between Saddam and al-Qaeda. Bush himself admitted that. In fact, bin Laden is hostile towards Saddam. After 12 years of economic sanctions, Iraq was no threat to its neighbours.

What Iraq does have is oil. Lots of it. Bush, the oil man, wants it. WMDs, terrorists, regional threat; those were failed excuses. Luckily for Bush, Saddam was a tyrannical dictator. Now the cover story is that they invaded Iraq to 'liberate' it from a tyrant. The problem is that people are dying faster now that they ever were with Saddam in power.

Unnecessary? Definitely.
Whose fault? Generally, the US. They put Saddam in power in the first place. Specifically, Bush, Rumsfeld, Blair and the other warmongers who are only in it for the oil & defense contracts.
Who should be punished? Those mentioned above. Saddam just got sentenced to death by hanging. I wonder who's killed more people, Saddam or Bush? Right now, maybe it's Saddam, but Bush can probably set a new high score if he keeps going. Of course, he's never going to hang.

My stance:
Saddam is a monster. No people should live under the rule of a monster. But if removing him causes more suffering & destruction, like what's happening now, we should choose the lesser of 2 evils and leave him be.
Instead, a wannabe cowboy sends his troops to fight an illegitimate war with little international support and no clue of what to do once he captures Iraq. It's the worst possible thing one could do. I think Bush and his flunkies will answer for the lives they've destroyed & thrown away. If not in this world, then in the next.

Answer 4

The problem with unfinished wars is that they have a way of rearing their ugly heads again and again. The Iraq war should have beensorted out after the Gulf War, when Iraq invaded Kuwait. It allowed Saddam Hussein to play games with the resulting war.
It worries me that we leave Iraq too soon. I hate being there - mainly because my son is a soldier, but I don't want my grandsons going back into a war that should have been finished with a totally satisfactory (that is democracy in Iraq) ending.
Every time a regime ends, their is turmoil. Look at Bosnia, Serbia, South Africa, the USSR etc.

Answer 5

Such a political issue and I'm glad it's been brought up. The war in Iraq is a fruitless war. I was listing to MSN and CNN yesterday and the situation in Iraq is no better now than it was a year ago, two years for that matter. We are actually fighting the entire country. We went into Afganistan and they have reformed, we liberated Kuait and it's doing very well. We liberate Iraq and they try to kill us. Ultimately we need to pull out and leave those people to their own devices. No need to poke our nose into peoples business who would rather die at the hands of a dictator rather than be shown the light of civilization. The deaths of the US soldiers and the innocent Iraqi's was not necessary and now it looks more like "GENOCIDE" rather than a war on terror. Whose to blame - GW Bush!!!!! The man himself is a TRAITOR to America. His foreign policy is based on threats, his domestic policy is non-existent, and his entire terms have been based on self-centered gain rather than helping America and improving the world. Saddam is to blame as well, but he's only a stupid dictator - the real international threat is our own President who seems to piss everyone in the world off. American's can't go abroad because we're hated, 9/11 was such a fiasco it's a shame, and let's not talk about the mis-management of Hurricaine Katrina. You toss in Iraq and the man is just short of Hitler! I think GW Bush should be charged with War Crimes and put on trial in an international court. WHEN they find him guilty he should serve his time in Chino Correctional Facility in California so he can get a taste of the bad stuff he's put the world through over the last few years. This whole war is a sham, it's completely a self-centered ploy to make money for Bush and his friends (see Hallburton!!!), as well as to make an invisible enemy - terror. Over the last 20 years who has terrorized American except Americans (and maybe Russia - but that was the Cold War). The war on terror is nothing more than a ficticious war that gives GW Bush the ability to do all kinds of crimes against humanity with no accountabilty and no restraint. That's all I'm out!!!

Answer 6

The deaths were going on out there before we arrived.

One can also say the USSR was a Justified Repressive Goverment, because they kept Cheznia, Bosznia, Yugoslavia and Romania under control.

After the fall of the USSR we see civil war all over the place, often caused for racial or religious reasons, but is THAT any reason to justify and support the Communist KGB USSR government!

Freedom ALWAYS brings violence.

The first thing you do when you become free is let out all the repressed stuff inside of you, you couldn't let out before because of fear "the man comes and takes you away!"

People don't know what to do with freedom and so they just let it all hang out for a while.

Once the US leaves, however, freedom may not continue. IRAN may help out the failing government and help the Shi ites over the Sunni, despite the fact the Sunni are the most populous in the world outside of IRan and IRaq.

As to who should be punished, basically everyone with a gun but no uniform and then those in uniforms who abused power.

Least anyone forget Saddam engaged in War with IRan and used chemical weapons in that war, he also engaged in an invasion of Kuwait.

Answer 7

i support the actions of the us and the uk in launching an invasion of iraq despite not succeeding in getting a second resolution. so the action was based only on un resolution 1441 which specifically allowed military action if iraq did not comply fully with the un weapons inspectors. " shock and awe ", the bombing campaign, was probably overkill, so i guess some of those deaths were unnecessary. the mess since the land invasion is nasty but it was probably always going to be like that. the iraqi people could not unite in opposition to saddam hussein's brutal regime during it's thirty five years, they are unlikely to unite behind a government even if a majority of them elected it. and of course it is all being whipped up by non iraqi islamic insurgents with an agenda to destabilise the whole area and destroy israel, no matter what else get's destroyed alongside it. who should be punished ? of course, saddam hussein. anyone found committing acts of terrorism against uk, us troops, iraqi government or security forces. that's it. how long to sort the mess out ? 20 years at least, i reckon but maybe it will be worth it. that's for the iraqi people to decide, they will get the benefit in terms of propserity and freedom. we will pay the price in terms of cost and lives of our soldiers, as long as our men and women are still prepared to go and fight for them. i wouldn't.

Answer 8

Yes, they were all UNNECASSARY..!

It's our FAULT bacause, we were not attacked by Iraq
19 hijackers---all came from saudi arabia( 15 0f the 19, including bin laden)) or egypt (the remaining 4, including al queda #2 ahman al z.). It's a PROVEN AND KNOWN fact that saudi arabia is the #1 supported of all things radical and anti-united states in the mid-east (not iran, iran is a distance 2nd).

Its no accident the hijackers and bin laden are saudis...!! The saudis WAUHABIS are the most dangerous element of the far right wing muslim elements; also know as the islamists. These are the people really run saudi arabia. The king cannot make any major decisions without consulting them first.

FACT: if there were no OIL in Iraq we would not have invaded..! PERIOD..!

Didn't we support saddam in 1980's against the ayotollah? we did indeed? why do you think this was?
Answer = (1 common interest.) saddam was never a radical islamists like the ayotollah or bin laden, which is why they never GOT along in the first place.

If saddam wanted to, he would have part up with Iran or bin laden don't you think? why didn't he? Answer = TRUST and life long tribal enemies...! Thanks to bush and those idiots we have now manage to merge all of those factions against us. Way to go idiots..!

Answer 9

We should be home protecting out borders. The terrorists have not attacked because they are planning the BIG ONE. It takes time. They do not want to hit us so soon. They have patience of a saint. We are ready now. Wait until we long forget, then hit again.
\
This war did nothing to find or fight terrorism. Actually it created more terrorists. If you kill 30, 30 more are recruited. Americans are hated more now that ever. Terrorists do not only come from the Middle East, many strains are in Indonesia, Phillipeans, Algeria, and more places. They are all working for the same goal, to get back at the USA. They believe we are evil and do not serve a righteous God. We try to prove it by attacking Iraq. What is wrong with this picture.
If we had the UN behind us then they would not have just one country to blame. They would have to blame all in the UN. They Un told us not to invade Iraq but we did to prove we could, to prove we are powerful and should not be reconded with. Was it worth it? No.

If our soldiers lost their lives protecting our country from invasion, then it may be worth it but not to invade another country and pull its President from power, throw him in jail, destroy their buildings and infastructure, kill many innocent civilians, bomb their towns and cities to rubble, ruin their health and demand that we help hand pick their leaders.

We should have stayed out as the UN suggested. Our country is going bankkrupt in this unnecessary war. Was it worth it?

Answer 10

when the lies were being hurled around the UN and the coalition of the willing were trying to convince the rest of us to invade Iraq, the French president, Chirac said, "Democracy is not a method, it is a culture. It is achieved from within, it is not imposed." If only we had listened to the Europeans.