English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

If this happened, what would things be like in Iraq in a week? A few months from now? Or a couple of years from now?

2007-07-12 10:18:09 · 29 answers · asked by Zezo Zeze Zadfrack 1 in Politics & Government Politics

29 answers

They would just continue their civil war and keep killing each other just as they are doing now. I would actually feel safer here at home with a strong armed forces to protect us on our own soil if need be.

2007-07-12 10:22:01 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 3

There would be chaos Without a strong government Iraq is headed for trouble and we cannot give it to them. They have to give it to themselves if they really want it.

There will probably be some sort of civil war. The people in Iraq have a lot of bad feelings toward each other. Maybe when they get tired of killing each other off they'll realize what they are doing.

I get the impression that a lot of the Iraqis don't think of themselves as Iraqis but as Sunnis, Shites, and Kurds. With the exception of the Kurds (who have enough trouble with the Turks) each group thinks they should be in charge. There are a lot of old hard feelings amongst these groups.

Staying there just because we lost other troops is not viable,.

As far as Korea is concerned, North Korea is a police state and South Korea is a growing economic power. The divisiion between the Koreans should have been decided 50 years ago. Legally we are still at war with NK, all we did was sign a truce not a peace treaty.

2007-07-12 17:29:15 · answer #2 · answered by SgtMoto 6 · 0 0

Oh dear lord i dont know why I bother with such things but ok. If the US and Coalition forces pulled out there would be a Civil war. The 3 main factions would fight it out as they have throughout time based on different interpretations of their own religion. The shia, sunni and kurds all view their religion in a slightly different way which has led to fighting for as long as anyone can remember.
I hate to disagree with someone here especially those that dont support the US effort but by choosing the battlefield...in this case Iraq we actually spare a lot of US lives. If we fought this fight on our own soil how many lives would be lost? Am I so jaded as to think there will never be another attack on US soil? No of course not.
Eventually whichever clan had the most power or the most support from their own allies would win out and a new regime would be established. I cant say that I think it would be a democratic society and it could be better or worse than the one we took out.
That is what I think would happen and no USA is not ready to call it a loss and pull up stakes.

2007-07-12 17:27:16 · answer #3 · answered by Capt_John_97 3 · 0 1

The civil war would rage, Syrria and Iran might get involved on the sides of Sunnis and Shiites respectively, and Turkey might get involved to assure that an independent Kurdistan didn't emerge from the mess (an eventuality that Iran would also likely want to avoid).

The most likely end result, years down the line, would be a brutally unified Iraq, in which the Sunnis, Kurds, and other minorities are systematically oppressed by the pro-Iranian Shiite Government.

That'd be my guess.

2007-07-12 17:23:04 · answer #4 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 0 0

First: The Shiites and Sunnis would start killing each other with little regard for anything else.
Second: Iran would walk into Iraq and immediately take over the southern part of the country.
Third: The rest of the country including Baghdad and the oil-rich Kurdish north would come under Iranian control.
Forth: Israel would face imminent danger to the east as Adolf Amadiajab (sp?) would want to carry out his threats of genocide.
Finally: we could kiss peace in the Middle East and the world goodbye!
Then we could thank the Dumbocrates for yet another Vietnam-style bloodbath after another withdrawal from an ally dependent on us to maintain their Independence from an aggressive adversary bent on blood, destruction, terror, and death.

2007-07-12 17:43:16 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

It was said they would lack the resources to continue fighting and in a short time the war would be over. the same things happened in Vietnam when the Americans who were supplying the weapons and ammo left it was that the north took over and a short time later the war was over.
Now they have a democratic society all by themselves.
I think it is better to let countries settle their own problems.
However, to keep the war going to get rid of the muslims the US forces have to stay there and train them to kill better and furnish weapons and ammo and food and training and medical care. So that eventually they will kill each other and not be a threat to anyone. so in a way it does make sense that the forces are there to keep the war going and keep them killing each other then we won't have to fight them later.

2007-07-12 17:25:15 · answer #6 · answered by cloud 7 · 0 0

You just gave the terrorist a steady stream of financial aid via the Iraqi oil. Now controlled by Iran (since Iran is responsoble for the manufactoring of IED's and a constant flow of insurgents), Iraq would be the staging ground for American attacks and terrorism around the world. Iran is a nuclear power / or close to it (it had nuclear power plants before) and would threaten the region, or the world.

2007-07-12 17:25:35 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

The young and hot blooded would kill each other, until the wise could gain control, then they would have to get-along with there different ethnicity's and religions. Slowly and sometimes brutally they would try to show the region and the world that they were once the cradle of civilization.

2007-07-12 17:27:24 · answer #8 · answered by wakemovement 3 · 0 0

in a week- civil war would break out
Few months- all of the "elected" officials would be assainated.
Couple of years- realtive peace and some dictator would be in control running it with an iron fist,
Decade from now- US president ______ would decide the Ruler of Iraq was a threat and would do a premptive strike.

2007-07-12 17:22:47 · answer #9 · answered by Rek T 4 · 0 0

the country would be mired in a civil war, heck it already is, Haliburton would lose a lot of income, Dick Cheney would lose all the prewar agreements he had made with the big oil companies, more american troops would avoid the meatgrinder G.W. was willing to sacrifice them to. Families in the states could try to rebuild their lives, reservists might get their old jobs back and save their houses, congress could get on with impeachment, and the United States could start to rebuild their shattered reputation.

2007-07-12 17:25:58 · answer #10 · answered by douglas m 3 · 1 0

This is the arrogance of the idiots that started and want to maintain this war, NOTHING, the people of Baghdad can rule themselves.

In some districts they have been able to keep out insurgents not with American help and firepower but by their own means.

WE NEED TO GET OUT.

2007-07-12 17:24:56 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers