Freedom of Speech Aside, Should People Who Have Never Spent A Single Day In Iraq Be Allowed To Comment?

Question

On what Iraqi's want in their country? Should people with absolutely NO EXPERIANCE, who have never spoken to an Iraqi, be able to talk about whether Iraqi's like or dislike Americans, Want Democracy or Want Saddam back?

I feel like this is equal to me walking into an operating room and telling the surgeon whether his patient wants him to cut here or snip there, do this or do that.

I have no experience in surgery and I have never spoken to that patient so how could I possibly be qualified to comment on the situation?

Again, this is not a freedom of speech issue, I understand everyone has he right to free speech and I am not trying to obstruct that. I am simply asking if people who are unqualified and have no real world experiences in a matter should have value placed on their opinion.

What do you think?

Answer 1

You have a valid point. But more important is that too many people are simply unwilling to educate themselves on what's really going on. They'd rather just accept an agenda driven source at face value. Then accuse anyone who disagrees with them of doing the same.

I point to the people who went off on you, into their usual anti-Iraq rhetoric and the normal liberal anti-Bush hysteria as evidence.

Answer 2

Typically, I would agree with you; however, most of the leaders who committed us to the invasion had never spent a day in Iraq, and probably could not have found it on a map without political boundries.

Certainly, the soldiers are bearing the brunt of the responsibility, whether they want to be there or not. The profession of arms is not a democracy. Actually, it is also socialistic, but that is another subject. The American public is also bearing a major cost in terms of national treasure. I certainly would hope they would comment, but in making those comments, I would hope that they inform themselves.

Honestly, I opposed the invasion. I still do. That being said, I also oppose withdrawing at this point. A conquering state bears responsibility for the conquered. We cannot leave Iraq in its current broken condition.

I guess I am the exact opposite of the American public--whereas over 70 percent favored war in the spring of 2003, I opposed it. Now, over 70 percent favor withdrawing, and I say we cannot. America will never truly be seen again as a world power if we withdraw now.

I guess so much for the political career I never wanted anyway.

Kelly B -- I don't think the point of the question was to deny anyone the right of free speech. I think the point centered around qualifications to have an informed opinion. We all see opinions expressed that are based on little more than Fox News, Rush, or MSNBC. We could distill it down to, "If you haven't been there, how do you know?"

I stand by the opinion I stated above, but we shouldn't criticize the asker without recognizing the point.

Answer 3

Yes, because people can do that without freedom of speech anyway. The absence of freedom of speech simply means that the government/police get to decide what is an acceptable expression - they do that anyway. The courts decide if it is socially acceptable, but are in mind to use grounds such as constitutions, bills etc.. to make determinations from.


As for who wants what.. the difference is

I think Iraqi's want

and

I am an Iraqi and I want


Note: that someone who has two iraqi parents may be Iraqi but may have never been to Iraq (unless counting the mothers body) etc..

Likewise why should 1 or 100 or 10000 Iraqi's be able to state "what Iraqi's want" how are they anymore authoritive than the few million not asked..

how does one interpret the answer?

Hold on that is just what you think.


Everyone has experience in life, and can guage what they think of something.

Also states are "global" and all encompassing. The boundries of a nation or jurisdiction is not the same as "the state" all true states have no real borders of state, as a state is not territorially but can be tied to a territory.. When talking about subnational terrorists.. what differentiates terrorist states and terrorists etc.. is that subnations are individuals who are not recognized, while terrorist states are recognized but conduct operations contrary to the rules of war.. for instance the US in reports that have been reported has conducted activities contrary to the rules of war.. so could be a terrorist state -- but would not be a terrorist organization. the CIA if it wasn't part of the US state department might be termed a terrorist organization.. but frankly it is part of the US government so it would rather be a wing of a terrorist state.

Why not comment?

I think the surgeon comment is a bad example.. but technically YES a patient should always have say in what the doctor does, the doctor assists the request of the patient and is obligated to only operate with acceptance and not to intentionally do any wrongs.

Likewise we are all responsible for everyone and ourselves, much like we are all responsible for the world. Neglecting the duty of state is essentially selling out humanity and our future. So yes we can say what we think, but obviously it is not a universally true statement unless you speak about your own experience. You can think what you think.. but you can't speak for someone else in a universally true way on a basis of logic and individuality. Someone can agree what you say about them though.

Answer 4

Well, I don't see how that would make things any better. Both Dem and Repub lawmakers (and others) go to Iraq quite regularly and talk with people - so the fodder for discussion is still very much available. Pew, Gallup, Harris and other pollsters, too, engage Iraqi public opinion with good frequency as well.

I can read any and all of these inputs and have an intelligent, informed opinion - and as a citizen, it's my responsibility to be so informed AND to contribute to debate.

As with discussion on any topic, one should always consider the source, so I think assessments are always occurring on the part of readers and listeners everywhere.

Having said that, I wonder what you think about the notion of rock-bottom *values* as integral to determining policy in Iraq (or on any public policy matter)? There IS such a thing as right and wrong, and for better or worse, that too will vary by the speaker and his or her experiences.

To answer you directly, I think it's incumbent upon anyone with an opinion to understand his or her sensibilities thoroughly AND for those sensibilities to be informed intelligently. Simultaneously, it's up to the listener to have the critical thought skills necessary to engage a speaker intelligently and without insult.

So there!

Answer 5

I think you have a valid point, however, I also think that people get caught up in what someone else should do only from their general vantage point and take on what is right and wrong. I've never set foot in Iraq but I know we don't belong there! I can speak to that any day of the week and not utter a word about what Iraqi's want, do or should have. I have and will continue to speak out about our role in the world and I do have that right. I'm content to allow Iraq to solve it's own problems and not dictate to them what they should do.

Answer 6

In this day and time, we have massive amounts of information and opinions at the touch of our fingertips. Using your example, you may not know anything about surgery, but you would know the basics between foot surgery and brain surgery. If you desired more knowledge on a particular procedure, then you could google it and study those resurlts.

I don't mind someone expressing their opinion, if they are willing to learn from others. If a person is closed minded, and will not change their beliefs because of their stubborness, then that person is has not desire for improvement.

Answer 7

People always speak of which they do not know. What are you going to do?

No matter what the intelligence, we were rushed into a war without complete knowledge. Did that stop the U.S. government from going to war? No.

So why should that stop anyone from voicing their feelings in regards to this war?

I know you said "Freedom of speech aside", however; people are always going to voice their opinions regardless of how frustrating it is to you or anyone else.

Shoot, most times I have asked a question, I get answers from people who have no knowledge about what they are talking about. Should I not take into account (or at least look at what they have to say anyways) so that I can be fair and impartial?

So, matter how you look at it, the answer to your question is that yes, they should be able to vent their thoughts and opinions.

Answer 8

President Bush didn't know much about the average Iraqi or even the differences between the sects of the Muslim religion in Iraq.

But he knew about the oil of the region.

So basically what I'm getting from you is that we should all just sit quietly like obedient children and let the adults run things.

Our system is set up to give every American a voice in government and it is our duty to ensure that the President and Congress ONLY use our military in defense of the United States!!!

NOT for wars of aggression to secure the control of Iraq's oil!!!

Read the "Iraq Hydrocarbon Act" if you STILL think this wasn't about oil!
This Act requires Iraq to open their oil to a foreign bidding system!!
IRAQ should determine IRAQ'S oil situation
without American influence! They should be able to decide for themselves what they want to do!!!!

Answer 9

Theoretically in a democratic society every citizen is free to speak their opinion about how their government conducts itself. You're right, though, not everyone is equally qualified to make a judgment. But isn't it possible that your experience is also biased depending on what you saw or didn't see in Iraq?

It's unreasonable to expect only those who've traveled to Iraq as the only ones qualified to judge...

Surgery is not the same as citizenship...

Answer 10

Yes, of course. We are a country of rights.
Some of us cannot fight, or even travel to Iraq, and even some of us want to but still cannot due to whatever circumstances. We who cannot, still FEEL, educate ourselves as we are able, support, and love our troops. Not allowing those who have never spent a day in Iraq to speak about it, cuts off their ability to communicate their support, love, and comfort they can give to troops through their words.

Yes, I know there are those who don't support the war in Iraq, but to battle their stupidity, we others who do, need to learn about Iraq, and SPEAK OUT!