Help with viewpoint in Iraq please.?

Question

I am so confused about what I believe about what's going on in Iraq.
When the war first started (as in 2003 ishI thought it was a good idea because of the atrocity of the 9/11 murders. Now, I am finding it difficult to categorize the war "now" with the war "then." I do not feel like pulling out will solve anything because it will show weakness and we are already too involved. But on the other hand, I do not think that mass killing will solve anything, even if it does "end the war." I need help with my "lesser of two evils" argument with myself.

Please don't tell me I should "think for myself, embrace yourself, yak yak yak" because all I need is a little help straightening out my thoughts and others opinions that are not politically motivated.

danka.

Answer 1

It not about how many people was killed in the Iraq, it about completing the job.
What did Kuwait do before the invation back in 1990?
They did nothing and give in every time Iraq thraten them.
It a invitation to the Iraq that let to invation.

Similary, to end this the army must really complete the job if not it will have adverse effect on America.
The Iraq people will forever remember America for abanding them not throwing their dictator out.
Terrorist that will boost their teaching to the new blood saying "terrorism" is the way to win
You never get any peace knowing more sick people who willing to blow up themselve and others in the name of their religion.
Like some one above said "get the job done", if not change the general in charge.

Answer 2

Impossible to answer without sounding excessively political. Over and above finding the right way in Iraq what we need first and foremost is to give Shrub and the Shrub administration the boot. With that done, saner voices will prevail and the solutions will come. Whether that means impeachment or stalling until 2009 depends upon the Congress. The Bush Administration lied to the American public up and down the line. Otherwise we wouldn't be there.
And we COULD walk out on that war any time we felt like it with little or no repercussions to ourselves. That's the difference between a military adventure in a foreign land and a defense of hearth and home.

Answer 3

Under Saddam, Iraq was a "terrorist state." It practiced terrorism against its own citizens, and supported and financed it in other countries. For instance, Saddam paid $25,000 to the family of each Palestinian suicide bomber.
After 9/11, it was decided to remove this terrorist government before it had a chance to sponsor an attack on the US. Al Qaeda had already been greatly weakened, even if Osama wasn't caught.
Many of Saddam's confederates have resisted this process, and they constitute most of "the insurgency."
If we pull out of Iraq prematurely, "the insurgency" may take power and institute another terrorist state like Saddam's, and we would be back where we started. Alternatively, radical Shiites backed by Iran (and Hamas) may take power and form a terrorist threat also.
I do not think that the war in Iraq can end very soon, because radical Islam is on the rise worldwide, and a global conflict is inevitable. But if we retreat from Iraq, we will not just be perceived as being weak; we will really have lost ground.

Answer 4

Iraq originally did not have anything to do with 9/11. It was an excuse, not a reason. Despite that, Saddam had proven himself a bad neighbor enough times where ending his reign was at least defensable, if totally outside how America usually behaves itself. Afghanistan was about 9/11, Iraq was not.

The problem is while Bush and company had a good plan for getting rid of Saddam, they had little or no plan of what to do afterwards, which brings us to our present mess.

Our biggest mistake, from what I can see, was disbanding the Iraqi army. What we should have done with them is transition them to help rebuild the infrastructure we knocked out. Instead we put them out on the streets, out of work and pennyless. They were, of course, largely Sunni. Keeping them employed would have cut down on the insurgency quite a bit, and for those that say 'hindsight is 20/20', there were plenty of people telling ol' George that at the time. Of course Halburton would not have gotten all those delitsious rebuilding contracts that way (cynic that I am).

Anyway, on to the present. We have a full blown civil war in the region over there. The real question is whether our presence helps or hurts the process of forming a stable government in Iraq. In addition, there are several other players, notably Syria and Iran, with an interest in keeping Iraq weak.

Our reputation is already in tatters, I don't see where leaving is going to make it any worse, and the line 'support Bush or you don't support the troops' is garbage. Bush has given me no reason to date to trust his judgement, and I do not expect that to change.

The resolution congress passed is also garbage: The status quo clearly isn't going to work, and trying to hold troop levels current is a recipie for failure. I couldn't expect less out of that crew though.

So, bottom line is, pull out, or use whatever means necessary to end the violence.

My take? Send in the extra 50K (forget 20K) troops, seal those freaking borders, really occupy the trouble spot neighborhoods, hell, salt the fields and poison the wells if you have to, but get the security situation under control. And if you can't do it then, get out.

Just none of this halfway nonsense. Finish the job or come home.

My 2 cents.

-Dio

Answer 5

What do you need straightening out?
The war is not going as planned. In fact it's a complete shambles. I do not deny that Americans had a reason to be pissed off. The problem with a war, any war is that the other side shoots back. You Americans seem to think just because Schwarzzenegger can fire a machine gun with one arm, that is how is done in real life.
In the meantime people on both sides die every day of the week.
I personally think its better to be a live dog than a dead lion.

Answer 6

The biggest problem is that we are there period. Anyone who knows much about the Middle East knows that it is a can of worms that once opened, will never shut. We first fought enemies who weren't afraid to die in the South Pacific in World War Two. Kamikazes, Suicide Bombers, and Bushido Code proved a very formidable match against our troops that ultimately had to be nuked back to the stone age to be convinced to quit. Note that it was the U.S. who was on foreign soil, without major allies. Connect the dots through history people, and cast off political judgement and concentrate on fact. This thing is un-winnable, and if you think we can win it, I dare you to read our history of warfare and see how this conflict stacks up logistically and politically in a global sense. Unfortunately our only allies are those small countries who try to be in attendance in hopes of having troops in country at the right time. As we have seen the war is so unpopular everywhere else in the world that our allies are forced to withdraw almost as soon as they show up in some cases. Yes, casualties are low for us there, but we are losing our reputation in the world as a country that can be trusted to be the only superpower. We are losing face in the global theater and quickly passing the point of no return for any sort of political redemption.There ARE those that agree with our mission in Iraq abroad, but they are few and far between and they are not outspoken.

Answer 7

Okay, let's look at a few things. First: In 1991, all the WMDs that Iraq possessed were demolished. I know this because I was there, and helped demolish a few of them. Second, even after his country invaded Kuwait, Saddam Hussein wasn't dragged in front of a national judicial system, like those responsible for the trials at Nuremburg after the fall of the Hitler regime. No, he was hanged after a trial that was, in my opinion, about 20 years too late. In this country, we have statute limitation laws; if it takes 20 years to get someone into the courtroom, more often than not, it doesn't go to court...

Now, here's the whole Iraq war take (as I see it): After 9-11, everyone screamed for blood, and they didn't care who it belonged to. Boom, we have forces in Afghanistan; another boom, and we have forces in Iraq. The sickeningly funny part is that those countries aren't really involved; if we wanted to name names, we could also go to Iran, Syria, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, and so on, but that would be dumb because we need their oil. So, better to say, "Let's go after these weaklings because they don't have enough oil and they're pretty much disliked by everyone!" And that, really, is the whole thing about the war in the Middle East. I'm sorry, but that's what it looks like.

However, if you want to find out for yourself, I recommend reading "Addicted To War," by Joel Andreas, as well as "Sleeping With The Devil" and "See No Evil" by Robert Baer. All these books sum up how the whole Middle Eastern situation evolved, and ATW offers suggestions as to how we might bring it to an end.

Answer 8

We siezed Iraq. captured the evil dictator and executed him for his evil acts.
We have secured for the USAand her allies the biggest oil well in the world second to Iran.
The iraqi people are bound to be a bit upset but we are managing to keep them mainly fighting each other.
Some sort of excuse is now needed for invading Iran or at least rendering it inactive while we suck up more oil.
The nextmove is to raise petrol prices at the pumps to the same cost as in europe. its called road transport tax and it will sting like a bull whip. but good for the revenue.

Answer 9

I suspect you're really a George Bush advisor.....but if not....well, best thing to do is bring everyone home and get the U.N. to do what they should be doing.
Too many people have died, many more will die unless a hard decision is made sooner rather than later.

Answer 10

s.o.s. glad you asked...u are not the only one confused about the war in irak -- and sometimes elsewhere. there is nothing to straighten in your mind either. if all goes according to plans --Irak will elect a democratic regime and will be friendly ally to usa. now, that was in the plans. as you know "plans" seldom work. and the irak-i war is no exception. so goes the war. sleep over it tonight. you will be ok tomorrow.