It seems that the original goal in Iraq was to rid the world of Sadam and weapons. Then it seems to have changed to help build a democracy and then to help build a stable government. So is the goal now to have stability in Iraq and then to leave? Or is our goal to fight terrorists and bring the battle to Iraq? If we want to promote stability is that realisitic with the Sunni's, Shiites and Kurds in seemingly bitter turmoil? If it is realistic to want to bring stability isn't this a decade plus long commitment?
Again this is probably a dumb question but I just don't have a clear grasp of the big picture and would like insight into it.
2007-02-01 05:36:32 · 7 answers · asked by Bruce Tzu 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
I wish I could answer this question properly, but frankly I don't know if I know the answer anymore. I supported the war because I believed that Hussein needed to be removed from power. I supported bringing stability to the region because the alternative would have been worse. However, all along I expected the Iraqis to take their fair share of the responsibility for the security of their country. I don't see a lot of evidence to support that they are doing this though. At this point I still believe we are dedicated to the idea of a free self governing Iraq, but without positive signs from the Iraqis that this can be a reality I don't know how much longer I will support our actions there because I am completely against an open ended occupation and we cannot be the police and military for that country forever. Don't really know if this helps, just want you to know you are not dumb and others share your confusion.
2007-02-01 05:47:19 · answer #1 · answered by Bryan 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Governments stated reasons for why we are in Iraq change almost every month. All lies. We are not there for any other reason than OIL. No matter how many requirements we put on the Iraq government to meet so that we can leave, they will never meet those requirements to our satisfaction. They are in the middle of a civil war, they have lost control & we know it. We need a presence in that area to help us protect our Oil interests in Saudi Arabia. We are not going to leave until we have drained those Oil reserves dry. We also need to stop Saudi Arabia from selling Oil to China. Anyone who thinks that we are there to help the people of Iraq is sorely mistaken. We don't really give a hoot about those people. Sure our soldiers care when they see starving people & try to help them but they are just pawns in this game of lies. Big Business & the military complex work together to delude the American people. This is a form of coloniaism but we have made sure that it is not like the British or French efforts to stay in these countries. The difference is that we say that we are there to help the people when in truth we are there to help the true power in this country, big business & the military. Don't hold your breath for our troops to come home, they won't for generations. We are there for the long haul, of OIL.
2007-02-01 07:15:01 · answer #2 · answered by geegee 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yet i wish you already know Maliki's gov is Shiite dominant gov. And Iran is Shiite. Shiites do not pick to wrestle one yet another. Non of neighboring countries pick to get entangled without delay in Iraq. Shiite friends funnel money and guns to Shiites in Iraq and Sunni friends do an identical. you received't see neighboring countries walk into Iraq. With exception of Turkey perchance who're mad at Kurds on Northern Iraq. yet this is separate difficulty. Iraq friends Sunni and Shiite countries. Non of them pick to work out chaos in Iraq that could want to offer Shiite or Sunnis finished administration of Iraq. The troops basically isn't out for decades. there'll be some important withdrawal starting up next year. yet we are going to nevertheless have ~50000+ troops there. in spite of in the adventure that they arrive to a call to pass with finished withdrawal no you may want to say for particular what is going to take position. this is totally unpredictable area. there is truly no longer too many who propose finished instant withdrawal. Many ask for more effective political stress on Iraqi gov in conjuction with sluggish pull out.
2016-10-17 04:35:11 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's not a stupid question at all - but you're guaranteed some stupid answers. There are several stated goals, but as you've pointed out, none really stick. The real reason for the Iraq war is to control oil. Once you think that way, Bush-Cheney and their war-profiteering pals actions make sense. Don't bother to listen to their lying words - just watch their actions.
2007-02-01 05:43:02 · answer #4 · answered by Silent Kninja 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋
the Iraqi war serves 2 purposes. 1. finish the job Bush senior failed to do and 2. give GWB extraordinary powers as a "Wartime President". #2 is the most important, otherwise GWB would be motivated to find a way out of there; take note, he has always regarded this conflict to out live his presidency.
2007-02-01 05:48:40 · answer #5 · answered by Alan S 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Our goal is to colonize Afghanistan and Iraq and make them the 51st and 52nd states.
2007-02-01 05:41:46 · answer #6 · answered by Mike 3 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Freedom & justice for all.
2007-02-01 05:44:11 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋