This war had nothing to do with "freeing" the Iraqi people from Saddam Hussein and bringing democracy to that country.
It has all to do with oil and getting back at Hussein for trying to assassinate Bush's dad, George H. W. Bush.
But like I said, oil also has alot to do with our occupation of Iraq. Remember, Bush is an oil man and Iraq has the oil.
This whole war has torn Iraq apart --- not to mention killing or severely hurting our troops, caused huge casualties
among the civilian population, done alot of damage to their buildings and their infrastructure; it also enabled radical
Muslims to gain power and cause terror there; and there are many, many other grave problems there.
The only ones who really stand to benefit from this war and occupation is Bush, Cheney and others in their group.
Anyway, we just need to leave Iraq, very soon.
Our soldiers in uniform are dying for nothing, in my opinion.
But this is strictly my opinion.
So, again I ask, what do u think?
2007-10-25
12:37:19
·
11 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
News & Events
➔ Current Events
The current strategy is to fight until we are able to successfully turn it over to the Iraqi Military and leave as soon as possible after that.
To simply say quit begs the question, where does that leave Iraq? Doomed to the terrorists, Iran or any other country wanting to take their land?
I am sick and tired of the BS about the USA not getting involved in other countries problems. Wouldn't that be nice...than why do we spend so much on relief for disasters, and humanitarian needs? Why do our celebrities go to other countries to care for their children, when we have sick and dying right here at home?
Because we are a nation who cares and it applies to the military support as well as the relief and humanitarian support as well.
I think it is very hypocritical for liberals to want it one way for social programs and another for the military.
Thanks for the question!
2007-10-25 19:29:00
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
1⤋
Every war has hidden agendas. It's been that way for the USA since the Revolutionary War--where both freedom AND money were the real issues.
Here's some other hidden war issues:
Civil War: Slave freedom was a front that allowed enough public support for the North to eye the real prize: Texas Oil (the same prize Mexico once eyed as well). The North was booming industrially, but they simply didn't have the coveted oil for their machines....and the embarrassing ousted South wasn't going to just give Oil away.......so it became brother against brother.
Vietnam: Russia was tired of paying North Vietnam's bills--and immense pressure was on the VC to get their act together. They needed a volitale international export industry....and South Vietnam diamond mines would do nicely. Problem was, some US empowered in D.C. had hefty stock options in those very mines.
We just couldn't lose those precious mines to the commies!!!
Ike naturally flowed US troops from Korea into Vietnam....and a reluctant JFK carried it along--until he saw the need to end it. And we know what happened to him for even trying to end THAT war..........
Vietnam was the first "dirty" war the US got involved in; they were surrounded by the enemy in "friendly" terrain in broad daylight on South Vietnamese cities---and the VC ran circles around us in their familiar jungles.
Granada: A rescue mission to protect college kids of some empowered D.C. politicians from a local flashpoint violent uprising. A few Marines I believe were killed in that conflict.
Desert Storm: Bush, Sr's answer for Hussein's "assassination attempt". Daddy Bush blinked when he had Saddam cornered....and let him go!!!
2007-11-02 04:36:50
·
answer #2
·
answered by Mr. Wizard 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Unfortunatly Iraq is a double edged sword. We stay we lose more American lives and money fighting a battle that we "may' win over the terrorist. Remember we already won the first war in Iraq.
We leave Iraq will fall into a civil war in which countless more will die and the USA is to blame.
TThe initial problem was the US went into Iraq ill prepared. Bush had the fantasy that once Saddam was out of office the Iraqi people would envy him. Well like most of things Bush has done he was wrong. When Saddam was removed from power there was no government to put into place so anarchy arose. This caused a lot of problems as every group wanted control. Bush and his drinking buddies wanted Iraq to be a democratic nation, but they wanted to control who was in charge. A little tough to do when the guy you want is the minority and in Iraq you do not cross religious lines.
The US needs to start forcing the Iraqi Government to take control of their own nation. The US military is not a police force, however that is the task they are currently doing in Iraq. Also the US government needs to start training an Iraqi Army for national defense otherwise we will have to keep an army in Iraq to defend them incase of invasion.
I agree that our troops need to come home, but done wrong and they will be back there to prevent a genocide. We need to train an army so that it can defend itself from immediate attack and until back up arrives. The problem is now that anytime there is a conflict in the next 25 years in Iraq the world is going to blame the US for it and require us to go in.
2007-10-25 20:02:29
·
answer #3
·
answered by Robbo_op_98 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
What do I think?
I think you're embarrassing yourself with you total lack of knowledge. Wake up. You're living in the past. You can't make a failure out of a success, no matter how hard you try. We're winning this war, our economy is the best it's been in our history. Why do pessimists like you continue to try to make the best times in our history into your idea of a depression? Oh, that's right, pessimists see everything as doom and gloom.
You and the "Jaded Leprechaun" should get together and continue to shut out the real world. Both of you are bent on ignoring reality and living in a sea of ignorance, but that's your choice. Just don't expect intelligent people to believe you and your hate-mongering ways.
2007-10-31 11:23:29
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
You probably need to rethink your opinion. The Iraqi people have voted for; and elected their own leaders for the first time in eons. Because of our military the Iraqi Men, Women, and Children now live in freedom and not in fear of a mad and ruthless leader! President Bush is far too upstanding to profit from something like the war he is engaged with! You really need to search and find the real facts of what has and is happening in Iraq and the rest of the World prior to pointing fingers and making in-accurate statements.
2007-10-25 19:51:01
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
The Iraq Freedom Congress (http://tinyurl.com/26yzpd )
is a libertarian, secularist, non-violent, democratic, and
progressive group that opposes Ba'athism, Islamism, and
nationalism -- as well as the US invasion/occupation.
The Iraq Freedom Congress has organized a self-defense
Safety Force that patrols neighborhoods in Iraq (population:
5,000) and has reduced sectarian violence there to zero.
However, far from supporting this effort, US forces have
assassinated the head of these Safety Forces
(http://tinyurl.com/25yknr ).
News & Views for Anarchists & Activists:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo/
2007-10-27 22:21:29
·
answer #6
·
answered by clore333 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
the war has nothing to do with George W Bush Sr it all started when Clinton was pres dent when he mad them mad then he left precedence now Bush Jr has to deal with this **** and i think he is doing a dam good job i voted for him and i would vote for him again if i had the change to do so and i have brother over their fighting so don't go their
2007-10-25 20:14:59
·
answer #7
·
answered by sexybabydollhick 1
·
2⤊
0⤋
Obviously you haven't been watching the news, or you've been watching the Communist News Network (CNN). Allow me to educate you. The numbers of casualties & insurgent attacks are declining. In Ramadi the unthinkable happened. they held a parade. Yes you heard right, a parade. It celebrate a new peace in the region, an apreciation of our troops, and to tell Al-Quaida to to go to hell. Instead of being one of the bloodiest areas. Ramadi is now one of the safest.
But hey, don't let the truth stand in the way of your crusade.
2007-10-26 07:41:43
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
i think ur very smart for seeing thru the bushshit. Be prepared for typical neo con smear campaign. I predict u will be accused of loving the terrorists whom our great leader can't catch and not supporting the troops. Draft dodging Bureaucrats support our troops by playing russian roulette with their lives. You may even be accused of not supporting the worst economy since the dpression imagine that
2007-10-25 19:41:48
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
3⤋
I agree. I never thought going into Iraq was an idea. But going into Iran's next on the Bush agenda. Not our econ..
2007-10-25 19:51:44
·
answer #10
·
answered by ball 3
·
1⤊
3⤋