this has been played by the media for a while and I'm wondering if it really is true or just prpoganda?
2006-11-18 13:56:19 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Food & Drink ➔ Non-Alcoholic Drinks
There is very little actual violence in Iraq. By way of example, it is far more dangerous to live in Washington DC than in Iraq.
The people making trouble there are not from Iraq. They are soldiers from Iran and mercenaries that country pays to go there from all over the middle east.
The situation in Iraq is actually a war by proxy with Iran.
Anyone knowledgeable about Iran knows that they have a long history of doing this. A good example is Afghanistan. They used constant assassinations of government officials to cause the government there to collapse, then they hired a bunch of psychopaths to basically form the taliban there.
The moment we leave Iraq, they will begin to do the same thing there.
The real problem here is that the US needs to topple the mullahs in iran. We should have done this way back during the Carter administration (I think Carter has made it perfectly clear in recent years that he is for the radical muslims and probably let them have Iran on purpose to begin with). If we don't do this, Iran will graduate to using nukes on their neighbors and on europe.
However, we have a problem. Liberals in this country want to overthrow our democracy and do everything they can to throw a monkey wrench into the system. People in this country are waaaay too stupid and foolish to stop them. The recent election showed this quite clearly. Despite acting like psychotic freaks, people handed the keys of both domestic and foreign policy over to them. Very disturbing what Pelosi and her rogues gallery have already started to implement.
The upshot of this is that Bush doesn't dare go after Iran. The republicans are way too vulnerable. He was hedging his bets, hoping to hang on through the 2008 election but this year's election makes that a moot point. He waited too long and really can't do anything unless Iran is foolish enough to direct terrorism our way.
2006-11-18 14:04:48 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
The history of Iraq is such that there has ALWAYS been civil war between the tribes from the time of the Stone Age.
Read what King Faisal said about Iraq just before his death: Iraq is a hopeless warring region
About King Faisal:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faisal_I_of_Iraq
Bush should have studied history a little more
2006-11-18 22:04:50 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It depends on your definition of "civil war."
Obviously there are lots of old scores being settled, and lots of power grabbing going on, and people are dying.
However, believe it or not, the death rate still isn't as high as one would normally find in a "civil war" (the USA had 450,000 casualties in 4 years in ours).
And, we definitely don't have organized political factions. It's more like a gang war in a major US city right now.
2006-11-18 22:00:19 · answer #3 · answered by geek49203 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If anything the media is trying to play this down to please President Bush. This is a civil war and it is spreading to other country's. Bush, Cheney and Blair should be tried as war criminals.
2006-11-18 22:07:50 · answer #4 · answered by lonetraveler 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You've been spiking the Non-Alcoholic drinks again, shame on you!
2006-11-19 02:12:29 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. It has been for months, if not years.
2006-11-18 23:45:01 · answer #6 · answered by ROBERT L O 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
And why is your "Question" in the "Non-Alcoholic Drinks Section"?
2006-11-19 02:15:17 · answer #7 · answered by Daimyo 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who cares. Let them all kill each other.
2006-11-18 21:59:04 · answer #8 · answered by chiligurl254 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋