Are we really in Iraq to help the iraqi people?

Question

I hear that's the case a lot, but I also see them going through a lot of suffering, major chaos, mayhem, and carnage that was triggered by our decision to send soldiers into their country. Sure Sadam was a bad dictator, but there are many bad dictators all over the world, and I don't see us attacking their countries to help their people. So that right there is proof that the "We are there to help the Iraqi people" is kind of a fib, and is just whitewashing the real reason to make things more pallatable. After all, sure over 100,000 dead innocent iraqi citizens, and over 1 million refugees fleeing elswewhere, water and electricity less available, torn up infrastructure, lack of an effective government, break out of civil war and ethnic cleansing, making the country a destination for terrorists from all over to come and learn and practice their deadly trade, etc.. is not what most logical thinking people would classify as "help"..would it?

Answer 1

No, we are there for the corporations to make money, control Iraqi oil fields, have a presence in the Middle East and protect the oil pipeline in Afghanistan with the permanent bases being built along the path of it. It is imperialism, pure and simple. Don't expect us to leave anytime soon, no matter who is President. Also look for the powers that be to either have serious diplomatic talks with Iran or invade them on some trumped up pretext. The reason we invaded was because whoever is at the top of the pecking order saw a chance to strike while Saddam was in power but had no really threatening weapons to use against us. He was neutered then disposed of. It is good that he is gone, but we didn't get rid of him for altruistic reasons.We don't get involved in Darfur, Sudan or any other places like that because they don't have anything we want.

Answer 2

We did not go into Iraq for the Iraqi people... if we did we would have had debates over invading Rwanda, the Sudan, and North Korea.

War is never about empowering the citizens of any nation with the exception of a civil war. Sometimes, the people are helped by a invasion but that is a byproduct of war... in this instance it appears that we aren't really helping the Iraqis that much (the middle class is fleeing in droves and a democracy can not survive without a strong middle class).

Answer 3

No, I think the US originally went into Iraq for several reasons (settle an old score with Saddam, remove a dictator hostile to Israel, liberate the oil industry from socialist control, appease a small group of Iraqi exiles, satisfy colonialist and capitalist ambitions to open new markets and businesses, spread democracy according to an unproven neo-conservative doctrine, and finally to help the Iraqi people through nation building by private enterprise and US government sub contractors.

Although helping Iraqis was on the list, it was not the primary or only motive, and things went badly right away in that department.

Now we are there to try to salvage Bush's legacy, and to prevent Iran and Syria from taking a piece of Iraq, plus a few other reasons that are very hazy. One telling piece of evidence that we are not there to help the people is the very low number of refugees from Iraq that we've allowed to immigrate here.

Answer 4

hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

That's a funny question. Yeah we're really helping the Iraqi people. Helping Kill them, their children and helping destroy their country.

We are killing far more people than Saddam Hussein ever did.

We are interested in helping ourselves to Oil, Military contracts, and permanent power in the middle east.

Helping the Iraqi's hahahahaha

Bush is a terrible leader right? Imagine if China agreed and invaded our country, set up military bases and killed, raped and tortured hundreds of thousands of Americans. Would the Chinese be helping us?

Answer 5

Yes. War is hell, no question. Leaving the Iraqis to fend for themselves would be worse.

Answer 6

look at Abu Ghrabi , do you call that help ??