and is it doing more harm than good, or more good than harm?
it's easy to give a quick yes or no.. but there is so much more depth to this than a simple answer. well thought out answers from all sides are welcome.
2007-05-29 06:44:17 · 9 answers · asked by pip 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
No one knows for sure, but I believe it is saving lives.
Think about it. Iraq was an ant hill anyway, and people were dying at the hands of Saddam anyway, but those were innocent people. The people dying now are those out to kill others.
So, even if it is not saving lives, it is saving innocent lives.
Plus, you also have to add in the fact that it MAY have prevented terrorist attacks in this country. Once again, no one knows for sure.
2007-05-29 06:46:47 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I don't think we are saving anyone's life or doing much good by being in Iraq. I don't deny that Saddam Hussein was a horrific dictator who deserved worse than his fate. However, I fail to find logical justification for nearly 3500 US soldiers to die for this "spreading of democracy."
Additionally, I cannot comprehend how tens of thousands of Iraqi citizens' deaths can be written off without considering the consequences of an enraged region producing more terrorists than existed since the war's onset. I don't see where lives are being saved. And I deplore those who consider an innocent Iraqi life less than an American's, if only because they believe that all Iraqis are, themselves, terrorists.
If I could say, *despite* the civilian and troops casualties that have been sustained thus far there is an ever-strengthening and independent Iraqi government whose infrastructure left its citizens with a far better standard of life than could have been hoped for under Saddam Hussein, and terrorist activity was on the decline around the world, then I would say more good was being done.
Alas, little, if any progress has been made in Iraq, and you almost never hear about Afghanistan or bin Laden anymore. I think the "quagmire" consensus has been reached, unfortunately, current leadership has failed to provide for any type of alternative strategy other than pouring more money and troops into the picture.
2007-05-29 15:53:08 · answer #2 · answered by genmalia 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Good question...I think that the presence of the American military is stopping much of the violence...if we pull out, Iraq would be like Darfur or Somalia...the violence is really only present in a few areas...there is very little if no violence in the Kurds areas or in Southern Iraq...it is confined to Baghdad and Sunni areas...if we were not their the death toll would be what Rosie and several wackos say of 650,000...not the 65,000 in four years...any lose of life is bad to a certain extent, but look how many civilians died in our Revolution and The War of Northern Aggression (Civil War)...Iraq does not compare to that loss of life...
2007-05-29 13:51:30 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, our presence in Iraq is not saving anyones' lives. It is killing more people than the terrorists could have hoped for.
In addition to an estimates half a million Iraqi lives, the US soldier death rate has far exceeded those killed in 9/11 or those we could expect to be killed by international terrorists. In addition, there is the secret death toll of civilian contractors that go largely unreported.
American military in Iraq actually created more violence by uprooting the strong central government and allowing the Sunnis and Shiites to engage in a free-for-all.
2007-05-29 13:51:59 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Statistics would indicate that thousands of people are being killed. Worse of all many of those deaths are Americans. So our being there really isn't saving lives. Saddam murdered many people. That is still happening but not by Saddam but by suicide bombers, allied military and just because people live in a war zone. The insurgents, the radical Muslims are doing their share for sure. A civil war is a bloody affair and that one is no exception.
2007-05-29 13:54:59 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
We are doing more harm than good.
The average Iraqi citizen is 30x more likely to die a violent death today as compared to when Saddam was running the country.
At least he kept a lid on sectarian violence and religious extremism.
2007-05-29 13:48:47 · answer #6 · answered by sprcpt 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Since 10 US soldiers died yesterday alone I would have to lean more toward the NO side.
2007-05-29 13:48:30 · answer #7 · answered by meanpressure0 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I don't see how less people would be dying if we left, but at least they wouldn't be Americans.
2007-05-29 13:49:22 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I haven't sent any presents over there, but if I did, it might be ticking.
2007-05-29 13:47:33 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋