Do you think the war has preveted more loss of life?

Question

This obviously has to be an assumption, but do you think the lives of those here and now in Iraq has been improved.

In my opinion we need to stop saying "It will in the future" because the Iraqis here and now are having to deal with death and displacement.

dead marxist,

I didn't argue that but thank you for telling me I would be wrong if I did.

Answer 1

The Liberation of Iraq was the right thing to do, period.

You may argue about the execution of the war and/or strategy employed, but the fact remains that a brutal dictator was removed from power - unarguably a good thing.

As for collateral damage, consider: The Liberation of France from the Nazis claimed some 250,000 civilians. But no one could seriously argue that it wasn't "worth it".

Answer 2

Why can't the conservatives give a yes or no to this question, and dance around the issue like Mitt Romney?

The answers is, NO.

I also love the fact that they base all of their arguements on things they think COULD have happened, when every prediction they have made so far has been dead wrong.

Moderates that are against the war argue on what IS happening and what happens in every guerilla war. Look up the Phillipine Insurrection if you want a classic example.

Answer 3

In my opinion there is no doubt the average Iraqi's life has improved from what I have seen and heard while over there. As to whether we have saved more lives than not, I honestly don't know. Its something I think about sometimes too. I mean Sadaam killed thousands of his own citizens but war kills thousands of innocents as well. It is unfortunate it has to be that way.

I think the actual number of dead in Iraq is around 70,000 based on this website.
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/

Answer 4

No; absolutely not. Saddam wanted to deal with the neocons on his own terms, he wanted to save face. Saddam did not like Osama and his Al Queda terror network and actually worked to keep radical Islam at bay within his borders. He was totally surrounded was allowing inspections and was willing to talk. The neocons however lost patience and went for the brass ring, which was part of their plan even before 911 occurred............IMHO, when the entire truth comes out (and it will) the preemptive strike against Iraq and its continued occupation will be seen as illegal in the eyes of international law and as the biggest act of treason ever perpetuated in American history.

Answer 5

Ok...No, it has not. In fact it caused more. In fact in the future it will probably cause even more. Think about this. Was there a "9/11" happening often? Not really...But hey, I am all for the war on terror. Tracking down terrorists and bringing justice to them...But...why are we in Iraq? WMD? No. Terrorists? Not at the time...they are they now though, thanks to the U.S.. I will tell ya what though. About 60-100 americans die in Iraq each month(avg.). Thats more americans that were dieing from terrorists each month(avg.). But again...im not against the war on terror though...it just seems like we should be focusing on the war on terror...pull our troops out of Iraq...let them help sucure our borders...I would feel safer with our troops over here...not over there...I don't know...just my opinion...

inreality---what? more people die from muslum radicals...???...the war in Iraq is a war on terror...???...man...watch the news...read a newspaper...

dead marxist--Im sorry...the U.S. should not have liberated Iraq on the terms it did...I will agree...Iraq should have been liberated...maybe back in the early 90's though...when we caught sadam in his backyard with his pants down and george sr told us to retreat...anyways...there are other countries taht need more attention than Iraq needed at the time...ie...rowanda, kosovo, columbia, N. Korea and many other african countries that are poor with poeple dieing daily...

Answer 6

That depends upon what would have happened if the war didn't happen; something no one can know.

With Israel having nukes and Iran developing them, would Saddam have lived up to the agreement that allowed him to stay in power by not building nukes of his own? If he had them what would he do? Would he attack Israel and/or Iran, would they attack him?

I don't know.

http://www.yaktivist.com
Polite Discussion, Respectful Disagreements regarding nonlethal pregnancy termination technology, death penalty alternatives, nonlethal weapons.

Answer 7

This war is first and foremost about the safety of American and American citizens.

There has not been another attack on U.S. soil since our government starting taking this threat seriously. This is a positive. It does not mean that there never will be another attack but quite clearly we have made some strides by being proactive in our war on terror.

There are people dying all over the planet (mostly due to radical Muslim factions). We are not involved in all of these battles. We are involved in the ones we feel will help our national security and foreign policy interests.

If your worried about loss of life you should focus on other areas of the planet where governments and Muslim radicals are killing thousands of people.

The United States is a positive influence in this world and is trying to do the right thing. We do much more good in this world than anyone else, please do not forget that.

Answer 8

I think it has not, anymore than teaching martial arts to a group of people will prevent injury immediately, and is likely to actually result in a few more injuries than if we didn't teach such a class at all.

If we base our goals on immediate results, we will live very short, short-sighted lives.

Answer 9

650,000 Iraqis have died. 650,000 human lives. These were not terrorists.

President Bush in 2003: "Bring 'em on!"

Brazen words, spoken by a coward, safe in America. He egged more terrorists into the same country we were occupying. This is a travesty. Does no one else care?

Answer 10

there war was wrong. an unfortunate result is that there is more death and chaos in Iraq then there was when Saddam was in control.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6451841.stm