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

Serious answers please.

2006-11-13 23:16:15 · 24 answers · asked by Ms Dynamite 1 in Politics & Government Military

24 answers

People may disagree but here goes, it cost far too much, too many lives have been lost and what really annoys me is that there are doubts surrounding the decision to go to war in the first place?

Weapons of mass destruction we were told, where are they???

Someone else made a good comment which was, while I also hate saddam for what he has done and welcome his death sentence, there were fewer deaths under his regime than under our so called care?

We need to get out and let the Iraq people get on with their lives. Obviously we are not welcome there so why are all our troops still dying??

Finally, this war has come down to one man who should he not have gained power we would never have hone to war.

BUSH

Not forgetting the sheep that followed his every move, good old Mr Blair!!

Should never have happened and this topic will continue to be discussed far into the future.

2006-11-14 03:02:02 · answer #1 · answered by CHRIS H 2 · 3 0

This is a good lesson we learnt from arrogance and selfishness. If only Bush listened to the 'no war' protest from the international community, more than 600,000 innocent lives would be still with us now. USA also suffered heavy losses for this uncalled for war.
Where is the WMD? Was Saddam really a threat to the world peace? Who is making the world a hell to live now? Saddam or Bush?

USA should not be in the hands of elite decision makers who do not take into account the repercussion of their quest for hegemony.

Iraq has been totally destroyed. How to stop this catastrophe now? Bush is leaving the office soon. And he is definately leaving the Iraqis in the most terrible ****.

2006-11-14 08:00:05 · answer #2 · answered by pgmetassan 2 · 1 0

I have great respect and admiration for our troops. Bush put them in harms way without a good reason and without a plan for winning. It is never right to launch a preemptive strike based on what you think a country is doing. You start a war based on what a country has done.

The Second War in Iraq is an unjust war. It has devolved into something we cannot win, the country has problems we cannot solve. The only thing these people really understand is revenge. Now, many people in Iraq think they must take revenge on USA and Brittan.

2006-11-14 07:35:55 · answer #3 · answered by Paul K 6 · 1 0

A noble cause to rid the world of evil people, promote human rights and most important to prevent nuclear proliferation in the region.....region being the key word here, the grand plan would be international nuclear disarmament eventually, having visited the middle east while in the military I think many Americans can not fathom the brutality of some regimes. I read recently of a religious law/fatwa being lifted the allowed the hunting down and killing of homosexuals or how about women being executed for having the audacity to vote........I just do not understand how we can stand by and not help promote human rights internationally, sure there is some corruption involved here in regards to politicians helping themselves to oil etc but hey show me an honest politician democrat or republican. It deeply concerns me that the religious bigots in control of Iran are very close to having nuclear armaments they hate the Jews so much and even their fellow Muslims the Sunnis....so the point is the entire region has to be taken into consideration when trying to achieve peace, there are so many good peaceful people there that are being brutalized by a relatively small number of thugs.

2006-11-14 07:50:22 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

America, should never have invaded. Yes Saddam was brutal dictator, but U.S. went in with only self interest. Their was not even a single plan in place, as of caring for traumatized malnourished citizens. Despite all government tax $$$ given to CO.like Haliburton. $$$BBS missing no schools, or clinics, electricity runs about one hour a day.Except at extravagant"American Embassy" opened August 31st2006. To Iraqi disgust and amazement it was one of 14 planned. huge pool, and golf course flood lit 24/7. Indoor working sewage yet American technology and know how can not provide the basic needs for Iraq.
The longer they stay the larger the resentment and hatred will grow. U.S. cut your losses, let Iraq begin healing process!....MARY

2006-11-14 07:41:53 · answer #5 · answered by mary57whalen 5 · 0 1

I supported the war because even though no weapons of mass destruction were found, at least it has meant the lives of thousands more of decent Iraqi people from being butchered by Saddam (have you seen some of these mass graves that they continue to uncover day be day?)

Iraq needs to learn to now stand on its own two feet and as such I would support a withdrawal, but it has to be a slow process as we cannot just abandon them completely becuase the whole state could crumble.

2006-11-14 09:11:17 · answer #6 · answered by Chris G 3 · 0 1

What so many people ,particularly IMO, vast swathes of irate flag-burning Moslems, choose to ignore is the question of WHO is actually killing all these innocent people. Are the Coalition planting the IED's? Are they rounding up college teachers, policemen, army cadets etc en masse then leaving their mutilated bodies in the dust?
Are they the ones sidling up to food stalls and detonating themselves and everyone else for daring to feed their kids? Seems the Western media is reduced to tiptoing around the fact that the vast majority of deaths by terrorism today are Moslems killed by other Moslems.

2006-11-14 08:47:41 · answer #7 · answered by fflerb f 1 · 0 1

There will be total civil war if the Yanks and the Limeys pull out. A "minimise damage" exercise needs to be put in place.
Saddam was a monster but he was no threat to world peace. None at all. This whole fiasco is over oil and bit of Sabre-rattling by the Yanks. End of story. It has been proven that there was no link between Saddam and 9/11. Think of it this way. Al-Quaida hate him as much as you and me. We should NEVER have gone in there. Period.

2006-11-14 08:05:33 · answer #8 · answered by Teacher 4 · 0 2

I believe the US and its allies should never have invaded Iraq in the first place, toppled its rightful leader under the guise of bullshit and installed a government friendly to the US (and its corporations).

The mess you see there now, is all a result of it.

Many people say, well they wanted to attack us, it simply is NOT true, never was, but trying to explain the difference to an American between al qaeda and Iraq as a sovereign state is like talking to a brick wall.

Too many lives on ALL sides have been wasted, because the US wanted to powerplay and they fucked it all up.

2006-11-14 07:23:32 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 5 2

It wasn't thought through properly. No exit strategy was devised.

The phrase "don't start what you can't finish" would seem appropriate.

There seems to be some confusion between Iraq and Al-Qaeda. There is no connection between the two, or at least there wasn't at the start of the war.

2006-11-14 07:23:23 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

fedest.com, questions and answers