Should our country [america] be fighting in iraq?

Question

what do you think? please explain :]

Answer 1

no they fight to many wars

Answer 2

We should never have gone there in the first place.

Unfortunately, we did. Even though we were misled by the president, went in under false assumptions, etc. -- we're there now. An immediate pullout would probably (not certainly, but probably) result in a massive civil war with great loss of life, attempts by neighboring countries to take over (Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria), and a bigger mess than we're in now.
I honestly don't know what the answer is, only that we need to find a way to pull out as soon as possible, yet leave at least a reasonably stable situtation when we leave. Personally I think that probably means partitioning the country into 3 areas (sunni, shiite, and kurd), then leaving UN troops behind to keep the sides from killing each other too much.

But I get deeply frustrated with Bush who just wants to keep doing more of the same thing that hasn't worked at all for nearly 4 years...and who blames Democrats for not having a "solution" to the mess HE got us into (with no plan to get out).
:(

Answer 3

lol, all the wars in the past have all been set up, in ww1, they tried to enforce their new govornment system, but it wasnt big enough, not enough deaths, not enough ppl wanting to give in to a single govornment world system, ww2 had to be bigger, and more deaths, they achieved that, and strung up the United Nations, after all this iraq and afghan stuff is over and dun with, expect to see the new world order emerge from the ashes of ww3, which will be soon, amazing eh, amerikan soldiers have to stay in iraq untill 2012, thats a long time, so amerika doesnt have any defences from its people, who are resisting total enslavement, the soldeirs wont be there to stop the nwo from rising in amerika, as a total fascist police state, bent on de-humanizing the entire human race, kill off 80% of the world population. They sure wanna get things done before the mayan cosmogenesis, i have no idea why tho...resources maybe?

Answer 4

We aren't fighting in Iraq. Iraq is fighting with itself. We are in the way. Caught in the crossfire, our young men are dying there for no reason whatsoever.

It is time to get out of Iraq. You can't rush democracy. Countries are like people-- they only become what they are mature enough to become. Iraq is not mature enough to handle democracy. The fighting will go on. We have to let nature take its course.
At some point, they need to learn responsibility on their own or kill each other in the process. In any case, we can't rescue the entire world. We don't have the resources.

If we keep this up indefinitely, we will lose another generation of young men (and women), as we did in WWI.

Answer 5

No, I do not believe in war, if Iraq has its internal problems I think they should take care of it themselves.America should take care of America and not try to fix other countries problems. I might be wrong but that is my view point. My country which is Spain finally got out.

Answer 6

TO TYLER. There were no terrorists in Iraq until we got there. Get a dictionary too.
This was just a way to get the economy pumped up, because it has been miserable under Bush. Whoever controls the oil tap has the power.

Answer 7

Saddam Hussein threatened to invade Saudia Arabia at the time of the Gulf War, so he had to be stopped or the world's oil supply was threatened to tumble. Since Hussein's demise, his supporters are trying to create chaos. This also happened in Germany after the end of WWII. Now that Iran is threatening to use nuclear weapons and they hate Saudi Arabia too, you can see that this is not going to just go away.

Answer 8

Wake up please. USA finest soldiers should never have been sent there under international law.

This sordid story shows the stupidity of the new government policy of pre-emptive strike. Unfortunately George Wya forgot to identify any credible threat before ordering a pre-emptive invasion.

This means that any potential future enemy will be so paranoid about USA's pre-emptive strike capability that the enemy MUST strike first to pre-empt USA's pre-emptive strike.

There will no longer be room/time for diplomacy only immediate warfare, after a war of words.

I fear the USA has entered a dangerous and ill-considered new realm of international warfare in which it will (eventually) cause its own largescale destruction.

We were safer in the cold war years (no pre-emptive strike).

Its like handing grenades to fighting kids and not expecting them to blow themselves up.

Answer 9

I'm sorry our president Bush invited all the terrorists to come to Iraq to fight. I feel bad for the Iraqi people, but I'd rather be fighting there than on American soil. 'm totally against this particular war.

Answer 10

No. The only reason we are still in Iraq is because Bush is covering his a**. He messed up and instead of pulling the troops out when they found no evidence of mass destruction. God I can't wait til his term is over.

Answer 11

I dont think america should be in any wars. I dont think the president has the power to put us in a war at will. If the president could do that then whats the point in having him? The truth is we need to fight these bad guys that want to take away our way of life. let me ask you this, do you want to live under a muslim gov? do you want the ayatolla to rule your life? can you live a godly life uder subjection of islam? one 3rd of the world is Islamic. If Islam was to unite all its factions under one ruler they could take over. Do you want that? over 1 billion people on this planet is Islamic What if they all decided to focus on taking over?