I need to educate myself with the war in Iraq, but I need a "for dummies" version.?

Question

I'm not even sure of who we are fighting. Who are insurgents? Who are infidels? Are we fighting to protect the Iraqi citizens?

Answer 1

you came to the right place. if you want the for dummies version just read any question or answer from someone that uses the words liberal,libtard,demoncrat or dumbocrat. they will give you the by dummies version.

Answer 2

My point of view, sorry not a complete source. Insurgents are people who are ordinary people. Not military, not soldiers, dont even have a uniform. A bunch of rag tag rebels who are fighting for an upheaval of the Iraqi government and more so our occupation of Iraq. We are fighting to protect our interests in Iraq, and not allowing the country to fall to a foreign power or an unfriendly government. We are fighting Insurgents and the neighbors of Iraq who are smuggling weapons and explosives and providing training to the insurgents so they can keep us from having a pernament station within Iraq.

Iraq's citizenry is made up of three groups. The Shiites group is largest and is in 'charge' of the current government. The neighbors who are also Shiite are Iran. Sunni's who were in charge under Saddam historically have held power for the last 100 years. They make up only 20 % of the population but were installed under England to control the Shiites more than a century ago. The Kurds were rebels against Saddam's government before and after the Iraqi war. They to are a minority people who have ethnic origins belonging to Turkey. The kurds have held a autonomous country within Iraq for the last ten years due to American intervention. The fighting is being conducted by the groups against eachother for control of Iraq. For lack of a better word this is a civil war between the peoples for control of Iraq and the vital oil supplies for which the Sunni people do not have.

Answer 3

The problem with the war in Iraq is that nobody knows exactly what is going on. Some people have better guesses than others, but the reasons on each side of the conflict are varied and gray.

Ask somebody against the war why we're there and you'll get one of a dozen answers: oil, personal vendetta, anti-Islam sentiment, our close ties to Israel, brash stupidity, rich using the poor for a "moral" fight, etc.

Ask somebody for the war and you'll get the same sort of treatment: it's our duty to liberate the oppressed, how dare you criticize our soldiers... I know you said war, and by war I am going to assert that you mean our soldiers should be executed... how dare you... get out my country, stabilizing the world's oil, the WoMD thing is still being thrown around after being essentially discredited by everybody with any actual idea, etc.

So as you can see the liberals are clearly correct. The problem is some of them supported the war initially, when it had the [uninformed] public's support, exposing them as flip-floppers who should have known better. The average American isn't supposed to spend all day studying reports and weighing things such as wars... we're a *representative* democracy which means we elect people in our stead to work full time to make such decisions. We pay them vast and ridiculous amounts of money because they are allowed to vote their own pay raises. A very scarce number of them have children in the military, and those who are veterans of wars themselves are not only scarce but are also ostracized as "unpatriotic" by screaming morons in Congress. One such congresswoman had the nerve to call a multiple amputee who suffered those wounds in an overseas war a coward. Awesome.

This is not an argument, this war in Iraq. It was clearly a big mistake. Saddam could have simply been assassinated, and all those who would fill the vacuum. 3000 of our soldiers and hundreds of thousands of civilians would not have been lost.

The argument now is whether or not we should cut and run, and pray for some kind of decent leadership to fill the vacuum... or, as is more likely, a full-blown civil war will take over and lead to instability much worse than we've ever seen in modern times. Saddam was an evil man, but his regime was stable if nothing else.

Or we can stay and keep sacrificing our own soldiers. Either way people are going to die, but the fact that the civil war is taking over despite our best efforts leads many to say we should just pull out and pray to the God who told Bush to send us in in the first place.

The insurgents are a mish-mash of every conceivable anti-American, anti-Sunni, anti-Shiite, anti-peace, criminal, anti-Democracy, anti-Christian, pro-guns and blowing crap up, people. They have no central leadership and they cannot be negotiated with.

We are fighting to protect the non-existent stability of the middle east. It's going awesome.

Answer 4

here's the version i got...

england and france divvied up the middle east in the 1800s and early 1900s. colonialism and all. they were just picking up chunks of land and resources. then, in ww1 and ww2 they got whupped and couldn't afford to hang on to them any more, which is how we got all those little countries including israel. i bring that up because you ask who the insurgents and infidels are... and that is why it's so confusing. it isn't really like if germany and france went to war, those borders were finished 200 years ago (except for hitler, but then they remembered why you stay in your country). the borders in north africa and the middle east were drawn so recently and so arbitrarily that there are families and cultures spread throughout them. we are doing the same thing... stomping in with force when we don't understand the locals.

in short, we went for the same reasons people always go to the middle east - resources. saddam was a bad guy, but he certainly kept a more orderly iraq and (almost) regardless of your ideology, order is always better than chaos. the infidels are us now that the war has gone so badly and the insurgents are everyone in the neighborhood who ever wanted to take a shot at the united states military.

Answer 5

o.k listen carefully. we had "our " own dictator in iraq (saddam) till he misunderstood instructions and went against us,so he had to be chucked out.
2. democracy has never been our interest,rather oil and good conditions for our billionair tycoons to operate their companies in the third world.
3. the plan was to replace saddam with our puppet president but the civilians in the pentagon messed that up,by dissolving each and every ministry in iraq and putting out millions of people on the street who turned insurgentrs or revolted or rebelled whatever you want to call it.the main reason for fighting is to control oil on which our way of life depends.

Answer 6

Well I just read that it is one of the worst jobs of 2006, being a US Soldier in Iraq.

Answer 7

"For dummies"? Any Rupert Murdoch-owned TV channel.

Answer 8

Just ask any Liberal. Especially ones with the last names of Pelosi, Reid, Schumer, Clinton, Kennedy, Kerry, Durbin, Murtha, Jackson, Sharpton, Feinstein, Boxer, etc., etc...These people are experts at being dummies.

Answer 9

http://www.newamericancentury.org/
Read the 90 page report from 2000.

Answer 10

Are you one of the newly elected and seated Democrat Representatives?