Is the basic assumption that american troops are helping somehow in Iraq correct?

Question

the basic thing holding iraq together are the so called insurgents,they protect the communities they live in. by arresting or killing them the us troops inviting rival groups to kill either the sunnis or shiites. The shia iraqi military is actually a death squad meant to kill sunnis so when they sweep suni communities clean of insurgents violence against common people just goes up as there is no one left to protect the community from the so called iraqi soldiers.And vice versa. so more operations actually means more violence.

Answer 1

From all that I've heard and read, 90% of the troops on the ground there think that they are doing something important there and that they should be allowed to finish the job. That's enough for me.

Answer 2

I feel that, yes they are, but I also feel American journalists give a skewed view of the things going on over there, mostly because I feel we have liberal news teams and a conservative President.

Should we have entered at all? Given the fact that the President was given faulty, damaging intelligence reports I have wondered about that. Should Hussein have been toppled? Without a doubt, ask any Iraqi living over there. The man was a monster, killing his own people. Not to mention torture. Why are we still there? That's a harder question to answer. Briefly, I feel our presence is strongly needed in Iraq. Because of the Shiite, Sunni conflict and also because of the nuclear threat from Iran towards Israel. Do we really want Israel destroyed as Iran's President has vowed to do? Hello??????? Can anyone say Armageddon? Iraqi Christians are fleeing Iraq in record numbers because of the whole Muslim conflict. We are never, never going to understand the Muslim mindset. I want to say, "why can't we all get along?" But when you have the Koran exhorting the Muslim to kill the infidel what is one to do? When I look at our country and consider we have Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Islam, Buddhists and others co-existing it makes you want to scratch your head or beat it against the wall.

I have been given to understand that the average Iraqi wants the US to maintain its position in their country and they are grateful we are there. Should we expand our position there? I really don't know.

Answer 3

Helping? -- a basic assumption to whom? Americans? Or Iraqis?

So different are the mindsets and assumptions between these two regions of the world that we must realize that one definition of what constitutes 'help' is defined as 'harm' in the other.

One is several thousands of years old; the other, barely 400 years old.

One is of the now Islamic base; the other, that of Christian.

One is that of the great Desert; the other, a green topograpy and ecology fitted with tremendous natural diversity and bounty.

One consists of a people who have lived hard, a rugged, salt-of-the-earth, heart-felt people, and who did long ago set the model for all the modern frames of higher education...

'While the other region, a young, dandified people, showing little if any testing and trials from the rigors of life -- actually and by comparison, mere brats !

Your last sentence is very close to the truth, in which the violence begets still more of same.

Know this -- American foreign policy has been a misaligned one since the 1950's at the advent of and subsequent detente in the Korean Crisis above the 38th Parallel that sets between the two Koreas.

The Iraqi unrest is but an extension of this same marred policy and with no less unclarity.

G.I.'s, as G.I.'s in the middle east certainly do not want boredom but rather want active meaningful lives comprised of good use of good and constructive as well as critical skills: they need not lose life or limb or both to succeed at these ends.

To that end ot achieve at constructive activity, American legislatures had just as well provide that value in any peace-time commitment or objective, and with need to allocate only tens of millions of dollars as opposed to several billions of dollars -- and without the now over 3,000 losses of lives.

Let's put this right: the Iraqi-Afghanistani debacle is just that, an atrocity, and which flies in the face of all propriety, of international law, ethics, economics, and apt understanding as well as application of sound theological principles.

The purpose for which we were sent and are still present in these two countries, is at best a post-hoc fallacy, and at worst a deception on the part of a Executive Branch that at the outset had no true mission statement or 'raison d'etre' [reason to be].
Thereto, the Iraqi circumstance was trumped up and with the full blessings of the power cartels, of which the oil industry is one key part.

There is no true reasoning for American troops to be in the middle east any further if ever was, which is to say, there was not !

Unfortunately, a Cycle has been initiated that may well have to run its own course and complete itself through natural means, which is to say, by now employing slow, deliberative methods, during which interim many lives will continue to be lost.

And in final, the underlying principles that middle easterners have not yet demonstrated they have the will to understand, will indeed continue to be overlooked. For no amount of subsidies will resolve this internal strife and hatred, only attrition will do so, in which such extensive damage will be wrought wherein they will find they have spent the energy that fuels their own dissensions and hatred. They will have to burn themselves out, not unlike any oil fire spends its own energy and dies.

Rather doubtful short of Divine Intercessions that will there come a closure to what has now ensued on and off for thousands of years in that part of the world.

The stupidity of all has borne few surprises, in particular that of the arrogance and cynical convenience found so evident among the Executive Branch of the United States government, who dare to interrupt in the affairs of others with which they have no business, except for selfish, greedy, and, I shall add here, racist reasons.

Answer 4

Iraq is notorious of their violent uprisings.
ever since they gained Independence from the Brits they experienced some 4 bloody coups. In between they managed to maintain UNITY and some stability, it's sad to say that Iraq have experienced its most stability under Saddam's regime.

Sadly too, Iraq's instability today is chiefly caused by Iranian agitators, Israeli intelligence and American gullibility.

If the US pulls out of Iraq, all the other destabilizing elements will be uncovered and cease fueling Iraq's rifts.
Iraqi people proved many times in the past they can manage their own destiny.
Alamaliki outcries of needed American is only an excuse to protect his fragile and weak governing.
Once US pulls out of Iraq, Alamliki will end up hanged at the end of a rope, all shiaa mullas escape to Iran and the rest of the country will unite and begin the rebuilding of their destiny.

Answer 5

Ask a GI. You can't get the real picture from biased media sources. The re-enlistment rate righ now is higher than it is during peacetime; so make whatever conclusion from that. But the boots on the ground know the real deal, not some talking head on a news show.

Answer 6

specific, there are nonetheless troops there, at our Embassy, yet some people continually confuse Embassy accountability with troops on the floor. the actual actual end to the conflict in Iraq will come from DOD.