Do you think the U.S. has done more harm than good in Iraq?

Question

I'm looking for well conceived answers. Please give specific examples.

Answer 1

Yes, we have done more harm.

Tens of thousands were killed under Saddam over a 20+ years. Since our invasion, many more Iraqis, particularly civilians have either died from our own military actions, or in the chaos that followed in a much shorter timeframe.

Under Saddam, people were killed and tortured for opposition. Since our invasion, people are killed and tortured if they are Sunni and get swept up by Shiites. People get killed and tortured if they are Shiites and get swept up by Sunnis.

People have also been tortured and killed under US authority.

In terms of basic economic standards - basic services (heat, energy, phone services, medical services) are below previosu standards.

In the wake of the increasingly violent civil war, all the professional and educated citizens are leaving the country, so even if things ever do get settled, all the skilled and educated people are gone and not coming back.

Under Saddam, it was brutal, but relatively lawful, much like it often is in totalitarian regimes. We replaced the totalitarianism, but not with anything resembling order.

Under Saddam, the society was relatively secular and it had a thriving middle class. Now the government is pretty much an Islamic theocracy.

Under Saddam, Iran was fairly marginalized and kept in check. Now, since the new Iraqi government is aligned with them, Iran is probably the main power in the Middle East.

Under Saddam, all the weapons of mass destruction were destroyed and there were no programs, as he played the game of complying with UN sanctions while trying to avoid looking weak to Iran and internal factions, so we invaded and caused all this bedlam for nothing.

Under Saddam, there was little to no tolerance for Islamic extremist terrorists. He did support some anti-Israeli groups, but that was more political. Currently, Iraq is a hotbed for terrorist groups who have been able to flourish in the chaos, and we've continued to provide them with targets to practice on as we've kept our troops there with no clear mission.

With Saddam kept in check by the UN sanctions and inspections, the region was relatively stable. Now, with the different nations looking to support the factions aligned with their own governments, there's a real danger of a regional conflict breaking out.

Nothing is better now than before. When you add in the harm done to the US credibility and moral standing from:

1) Pre-emptive invasion based on false pretenses (Think USSR invasions of Hungary, Afghanistan, etc.).

2) Our willingness to torture and commit other human rights abuses, contrary to our rhetoric.

3) The blatant economic exploitation by corporations without consequence.

I think "utter fiasco" is too soft a characterization.

Answer 2

Getting rid of Saddam in the short run was a good thing to do but in the long run it is a disaster that totally shifted the balance of power in Iraq/ the Mideast which will be much worse (& kill 1000x more people than Saddam ever did). Saddam was the only thing that was keeping the Iraqi Shiites & Iraqi Sunni from starting a civil war & if that civil war spreads outside Iraq the entire Mideast will erupt into a major regional war that will tear apart the entire mideast & maybe the world. Bush never gave that any thought before he invaded Iraq & the US/US military will be paying for that major mistake he made for many years to come.

Answer 3

No. There is a lot of upheaval, but the Iraqis have a chance for a better future, and one that has been made by their own hard work.

Regardless of what anyone says, it was not all love and roses under Saddam. Fallujah was already a hive for terror-radicals, and Saddam largely left it alone as long as they stayed there.

There was a great deal of poverty in Iraq, and one of the reasons Saddam invaded Kuwait was because Iraq was crumbling and needed their wealth. Saddam's regime would likely have collapsed eventually, probably after Qusay killed him off.

The people being killed are almost all being killed by people who come into Iraq to incite trouble... mostly Iranians, and by their own countrymen who are trying to get the Iraqi people to drive America out so they can take over.

It was recently discovered that the Iranians were helping both the Shia and the Sunnis, so it sounds to me like Ahmadinejad has designs on Iraq... and the Iraqis would not like that much.

No new government was ever begun without growing pains. The Iraqis have a future now. Count on it.

Answer 4

No, I don't.

Look at this way, for the FIRST time in nearly FIVE THOUSAND years, the people have had their first election. Right now, women are able to GO TO SCHOOL and get educated. Many of the areas that were without power or running water now have them, and, most of all a mass mudering rapist tyrant is no longer in charge.

The fact of the matter is, the media of today HATE Bush (not dislike, not disagree with, not feel his doing a bad job, they HATE him.) So reporting anything positive occuring in Iraq is going to look like they believe Bush did a good thing, so they simply ignore all the good our soldiers are doing in order to support their own bias, even at the cost of troop morale.

If you want a real answer on whether or not U.S. is doing more harm than good, you should go straight to the people who are actually, the soldiers on the ground. You can't rely on the media to give you an accurate picture.

Yes, there's a lot of problems going on, and you spread a lot of blame in different places for that, but I think they set out to do a good thing, and progress is being.

Regardless, you do need to keep in mind the bias in media as you watch the reports and not just take everything they tell you at face value.

Answer 5

at the beginning, the conflict in Iraq has completed not something to help this united states's financial undertaking. we've completed not something yet pour money right into a distant places conflict. additionally, if all of that manpower and money replaced into used in Afghanistan attempting to locate bin encumbered, we in all probability could have by now, yet now that is too overdue. Al Queda has grow to be a "rally call" for Islamic extremists. It now not exists as one entity controlled by bin encumbered. that's now many companies making use of the comparable call and making use of that social impact, without surely being interconnected. by pursuing objectives in Iraq, we've allowed this to take place. If shall we've stopped al Queda till now, we can't have this situation now.

Answer 6

It just never ceases to amaze me how many Americans still support Bush’s ill conceived, badly planned invasion of Iraq. The reasons for the invasion have changed several times (links to 9-11 {even Bush has recanted that one}, WMD {the 500 artillery shells not even strong enough to give you a carpet burn}, Terrorists {there are now!}, oh yeah – bringing democracy to the region), the slogan used has changed even more, and the damn place has spiraled into a civil war. Some like to quote the intelligence (dubious at best) that “everyone saw” as justification for the invasion. Firstly, everyone DID NOT see all of the evidence that the Bush administration had. The intelligence professionals who had information counter to the administrations’ objectives were marginalized or ignored. The Senate select committee did NOT see all of the intelligence. They saw more than the Congress at large, but by no means saw all that the Bush admin had. Also, some of you like to post multiple quotes from democrats about how dangerous Sadam was and that we needed to do something, agreed. Not one of them advocated INVADING the damn place! They knew better than that! Our military has been squandered over there. They are brave men and women who follow lawful orders from their superiors, as it should be. But remember, it is the civilian leadership that directs military policy and it is the civilian leadership that is to blame. As far as the insurgency in Iraq, imagine if you were a young man, law and order had broken down (remember, the invaders dismantled the police force), other factions within your country saw the opportunity to take power and influence by the gun (remember, the invaders dismantled the government too) and your only way (even though it’s not a good way, but it’s all ya got) to try to protect your family, tribe, religious group was to retaliate. Add into that mix a group of people that don’t want a foreign country occupying their country so they attack the invaders….you got yourself a big mess. My point is, this administration has largely created this mess through their incompetence, ideological fantasyland, and total lack of understanding of societal nuances in that part of the world

The people over there are not interested in attacking us over here, that’s just a scare tactic. The ones who want to attack us are in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and spread out in other places. The Bush administration has CREATED a hot house for terrorists in Iraq. If this administration had kept it’s eye on the ball of catching the terrorists and destroying their network along with dealing with the root causes of these groups (no, I didn’t say that we should placate them) rather than constructing a petri dish for creating more, we would be a lot further along towards “Mission Accomplished”.

What on God’s Green Earth makes anyone think that this administration has the foggiest idea what to do next?

Answer 7

The U.S. has done more good , in my opinion, by presenting the Iraqis with the opportunity to determine their own future. Which is more than Saddam Hussein or most of the other countries in the world were willing to do for them.

Weather they take advantage of this opportunity or go with another strong man dictator, is up to them alone.

Answer 8

I believe that though we were not completely sucessful, we did some good. Saddam, the man people slaved under, is dead, and a lot of people over there are trying to learn how to live again. In america, though, media misleads everyone and so everyone thinks we are seriously failing, when we aren't.

Answer 9

No, I don't think so, because Iraq is spoilt, and US did more useful things to Iraq; I don't mean just to Iraq, It has done good to most of the countries over the world....!

Answer 10

More harm. What examples do you need??!! Just look at the news. Fox news can't even spin a good story about Iraq.