I keep hoping you'll get a serious answer so I don't have to do it. Im too tired to do this question justice, because if you're sincere, its a good question.
But let me try...
Iraq is unstable.
If we leave before Iraq is stabilized, no one is positive about exactly what would happen, but most of the scenarios look awfully bad for Iraq and in the long run, for us.
The Sunnis and the Shites are currently engaged in a power struggle. Its one of the reasons why the Iraqi government has been so ineffective--members of the government are actively undermining the work of other members not in their group. The Kurds for the most part, are marginalized by both groups.
One theory is that if an UNSTABLE Iraq is left without an American presence, the country will descend (even more than it already has) into chaos, and massive amounts of killing between sects. This is made easier by the fact that the Iraqi government requires that the sect of a person be put on their ID cards. Already, death squads work by stopping random vehicles, checking IDs and killing all the people not of their sect. This activity is somewhat curtailed by american patrols.
The US has thousands of military and civilian advisors in country, trying to build up the Iraqi military and Iraqi police force, so that they can turn security over to them and leave. Unfortunately, much of the military and police force is riddled with sectarian insurgents who use the power and information they have as members of the military and police force to set traps for the other sects and for US personnel. So, to be sure, its a very difficult job. The end target for these folks trying to accomplish the mission is to get a competent police and military force in place so that we can withdraw and let the Iraqis take care of that themselves. Unfortunately, at present, to do so would be like setting the wolf to guard the chickens.
But unless we get this done and leave a country that can provide its own security, Iraq will implode. The killing will be encourgaged (as it currently is) by Iran, who may then choose to move into Iraq. (Some projections support this, some dont.)
Either way, the end result is that Iraq will then be a haven for terrorism. We're trying very hard to eliminate safe havens in Afghanistan and now with great difficulty in Pakistan. To give Iraq over would set back our efforts everywhere else by a great deal. Also, it'd mean that eventually, we'd end up having to deal with them again as being a haven for terrorists.
Also, to the people in Iraq, stabilization is important because at present, they are being killed by the droves. The majority of the population would really like the fighting to be ended, so they can live their lives without fear.
2007-08-01 18:54:14
·
answer #1
·
answered by Merissa F 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Why do people have such short memories? The situation in Iraq is so similar in so many ways to the one we face in South East Asia it truly is scary. To ask why victory is important and get a viable answer, one need only look at the results of defeat.
When Congress cut the legs out from under the South Vietnamese in 1974/75, they put into motion a chain of events caused severe damage to not only the people of that nation, but several other nations as well.
In cutting and running as we did, we signaled our enemies that we no longer had the guts to stick it out, and fight to win. The biggest reason we cut and ran was the distorted perception the media provided the american people that TET made the war unwinnable. TET was a resounding defeat for the north, and nearly broke the back of their entire movement. Had the media TRUTHFULLY reported the conflict, the american people would have supported the troops, and I'm quite sure South Vietnam would still be in existance today.
But what did actually happen? When the funding dried up, the North Vietnamese were able to rebuild ( the USSR certainly DID NOT stop their funding!!!! ) and move in.
The Power vacumm created by our departure can be directly attributed to the more than 3.5 MILLION deaths at the hands of the North Vietnamese and Pol Pot in Cambodia.
World opinion of the United States thru out the late 1970's was that of a paper tiger. He had a reputation of being weak willed, and militarily weak. This did not placate our enemies, it emboldened them.
From 1974 to 1979 how many countries fell to communism? Off the top of my head.... Chad, Zaire, Nicaraugua, Mozambique, Afghanistan, and many more I've forgetten about.
How many TRILLIONS of dollars were spent on the military buildup in the 80's to reverse this slide? The old saying "pay me now, or pay me later" still hold true. Only it is ALWAYS more expensive later.
Which brings us to today. Same scenario, only instead of Communism, we have Radical Islam. The voter turnout in Iraq should tell even the most vapid liberal that the people of that country are serious about democracy. Are we going to turn our backs on them, as we did the S. Vietnamese, and allow the same thing to happen?
And if we do, what will be the worlds opinion of us this time? You can only abandon your friends so many times, before you quickly run out of friends. Better to be thought of as a principled bully, than a spineless coward.
2007-08-01 19:22:04
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
if we leave iraq it shows the u.s. in defeat. yes i do agree it was bs for the reason we went into iraq but i am also glad we invaded. when has the united states stood back and let innocent lives be killed by terrorist. if we stand back and tuck our tails between our legs it shows the terrorist we are scared and we can expect more attacks on u.s. soil. its funny how some people complain its the republicans that want this war, whenever a democrat running for president wants to invade pakistan? answer that. as for oil..there is a few reasons, yes its war but another reason very few no about is china is starting to become a more maufactured country such as wanting to make more steel and such. with that inmind more oil is needed for china aswell. do a little research on it...but bottom line is...i think the democrats and republicans are both corrupt and the u.s. needs a major make over
2007-08-01 18:48:51
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Anyone who puts as much emphasis on vitory in IRAQ rather than victory against Al Queda in Pakistan is completely deluded with the facts.
People/republicans want to stay in IRAQ because thats where bush led us all.
Everyone conceeds - except die hard bushies -- it was a mistake to go into iraq without a true plan.
Now we're stuck.
No were not....but thats what they want you to believe so that Bush can push the responsibility off to another president,
All the while, he and his repuke friends will reep the rewards of all that money that goes into IRAQ...by the billions.
Bush is clever enough to know that (hes sneaky to the point of being dangerous to all america)..but he knows its not about IRAQ now that Saddam i gone...its all about time now.
Buying time to pass this burden to someone else.
Hes already profitted from removing saddam....
hes alreayd profitted enough for the likes of haliburton who last quarter posted 1.5 Billion in revue (3 months mind you)
Now its all about buying time..plain and simple.
2007-08-01 21:46:21
·
answer #4
·
answered by writersbIock2006 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
There are American oil companies in Iraq right now working to rebuild the oil industry. The oil will be brought to the United States by the oil import company owned by President Bush's father. You did know that Bush Senior has been in the oil import business since the finished as President, right?
2007-08-01 18:41:34
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Important for who?
The only people it really matters to are the Republican party -- because that's the only way they don't get tromped in 2008. If they can somehow show the past 5 years weren't entirely pointless and a waste of life.
It matters not at all to the US people, because nothing that happens in Iraq affects our safety at all.
It matters only barely to the terrorists -- they're not in Iraq. But the longer we stay in Iraq, the more they recruit. And the longer we stay in Iraq, the less attention we're paying toward stopping them.
It matters to the Iraqi people -- but they overwhelmingly want us gone.... so does the Iraqi govt.
2007-08-01 18:35:48
·
answer #6
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
1⤊
2⤋
When has victory in any war not been important?
2007-08-01 18:47:46
·
answer #7
·
answered by woodchipper890 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Victory means everything to USA.... while nothing to the
terrorists.
2007-08-01 18:55:22
·
answer #8
·
answered by dodadz 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
i dont know but they should just make things shorter and interview each iraqi and the ones that seem involved with al quada leave them there the ones that arent take them some place else...after that is taken care of just bomb the hell out of iraq
2007-08-01 18:34:05
·
answer #9
·
answered by Secret Identity 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
victory means a sunni dictater who abides by saudi oil quotas and keeps profits up for exxon. it's very important to the saudis and oil companies. it means record profits. it means no competition. it means $3.00+ gas for you and me.
2007-08-01 18:33:31
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋