Time to get out of Iraq

[mmarsh]

They are not the same. North Korea was an independent country invading another independent country. Secondly it was the UN not the US that came to the Souths aid. Vietnam was a Civil War, two rival factions fighting for absolute power. Just like Iraq, we had no business to intervene, Saddam was a tyrant, but he was internal Iraqi matter and he should have been left that way.

 

[Rob Henderson]

Justice was in jeopardy, therefore, we intervened. We then felt an obligation to finish what we started. You still haven't addressed my point...

 

[mmarsh]

Justice was in jeopardy, therefore, we intervened. We then felt an obligation to finish what we started. You still haven't addressed my point...

It is the peoples choice. A dictator must keep his population passive. If he fails to do he gest overthrown. Dictators only survive if their people LET THEM survive. Secondly there are other ways of dealing with dictators other than sending in US troops.

As for your second point, justice is trampled on every single day somewhere in the world. It is not the U.S's job to play world cop. There are over 30 countries with dicators, (some even worse than Saddam). Do you want to invade those countries as well?

 

[Rob Henderson]

It is the peoples choice. A dictator must keep his population passive. If he fails to do he gest overthrown. Dictators only survive if their people LET THEM survive. Secondly there are other ways of dealing with dictators other than sending in US troops.

As for your second point, justice is trampled on every single day somewhere in the world. It is not the U.S's job to play world cop. There are over 30 countries with dicators, (some even worse than Saddam). Do you want to invade those countries as well?

Ahh, but tell me this...Dont dictators make it impossible for their citizens to uprise? Didn't Saddam make sure Iraq was so poor, he looked like a god when he stepped in? "True power doesn't come from office or weapons, true power comes from the ability to destroy another's beliefs and replace them with your own. Only then can you establish true peace and understanding." Saddam merely told the people of Iraq that they needed him, and they were unfortunately too sheltered to know that a better life existed...Sheep follow because they know nothing else. Please, enlighten me on the other ways a dictator would accept to relinquish his power.


The United States plays world cop because if we didn't, who else would? And yes. If we had the resources to invade those countries, I would wish every dictator's country invaded, and every dictator overthrown.

 

[The Cooler King]

They are not the same. North Korea was an independent country invading another independent country. Secondly it was the UN not the US that came to the Souths aid. Vietnam was a Civil War, two rival factions fighting for absolute power. Just like Iraq, we had no business to intervene, Saddam was a tyrant, but he was internal Iraqi matter and he should have been left that way.

Oh yea, the glorious UN to the rescue. It all the United States with a few brigades from various countries. Now I don't mean to disrespect the soldiers from other countries, but all combined they only made up about 20% of the force.

South Vietnam was an independent country. They had their own government, their own money, their own leader. Vietnam wasn't unified until we cut and ran and the south succumbed to Communism. Only then was it one country.

 

[deerslayer]

as a writer and patriot, it disturbs me to read articles of this sort. The details of the war are great (i.e. cost etc.) but this author does not see the big picture very well. In some regards, it is uninformed and in a way ignorant of the political wheels turning at the moment. It's disturbing to see the people (left, right, center, I really don't care because it ahppens everywhere) focusing on the letters instead of teh total writing on the walll.

 

[Senior Chief]

The political implications are far outweighed by the human rights that we are trying get established for the people there.

I don't think many of the people that argue the points decrying the war in Iraq have any clue as to what the diferences will be for the general population there.

Will the death of innocents stop if we continue? Probably not. Will the deaths fo the innocents stop if we leave? Probably not.

If we pull out now I think we will send the world a message, we are not committed to what we say and that is bad, very very bad.

I stand behind our decision to go into Iraq as well as stand behind our President and country.

I'm a believer in "My country, right or wrong." I don't see that in all Americans anymore.

 

[deerslayer]

Well-spoken Senior Chief. It's a damned if we do, damned if we don't situation, and a lot of it is due to bungling stateside in the actual handling of the conflict. However, as I said earlier, I see the media as obtrusive and much too partisan, as some of the articles posted here (see this and "Rangel: An Attack on Bush is An Attack on All Americans"). Balance just doesn't happen in the media, and the big picture is becoming a thing of the past.

 

[MontyB]

The political implications are far outweighed by the human rights that we are trying get established for the people there.

I don't think many of the people that argue the points decrying the war in Iraq have any clue as to what the diferences will be for the general population there.

Will the death of innocents stop if we continue? Probably not. Will the deaths fo the innocents stop if we leave? Probably not.

The question is would they have happened at all if you had stayed out?
Now I have no doubt that the family Hussein were a bunch of crazed lunatics who sorely needed a bullet to balance their views but as to whether the rest of Iraq needed the mess thats been created is open to argument.

If we pull out now I think we will send the world a message, we are not committed to what we say and that is bad, very very bad.

I dont want to be the messenger here but too late its a message the world has known since Vietnam.

I stand behind our decision to go into Iraq as well as stand behind our President and country.

Good for you but being a "patriot" doesnt make you right.

I'm a believer in "My country, right or wrong." I don't see that in all Americans anymore.

Now we get the bit that makes you scary because I too believe in my country but I am also prepared to make my voice heard when I believe we are wrong and to do otherwise is in part a sign of a poor democratic ideal.

 

[Rob Henderson]

The question is would they have happened at all if you had stayed out?
Now I have no doubt that the family Hussein were a bunch of crazed lunatics who sorely needed a bullet to balance their views but as to whether the rest of Iraq needed the mess thats been created is open to argument.

Well, considering that the entire Hussein family controlled all of Iraq...Don't they immediately connect with each other?

I dont want to be the messenger here but too late its a message the world has known since Vietnam.

You're right. The United States should have stayed in Vietnam to finish the job. Here's what makes this country so great...We know we should have stayed in, and that's why we are staying in Iraq to help reconstruct. We LEARNED from our mistake.

Good for you but being a "patriot" doesnt make you right.

Once again, you are correct. But, do you think the decsion to go into Iraq and help promote a free nation where people are able to do what they please was wrong? Do you think we ought to have left well enough alone like mmarsh? Should we have just let human beings suffer under the rule of a cruel tyrant? "Never leave a man behind."

Now we get the bit that makes you scary because I too believe in my country but I am also prepared to make my voice heard when I believe we are wrong and to do otherwise is in part a sign of a poor democratic ideal.

So, once again, I ask you, do you believe that the choice to liberate a nation was wrong?

 

[MontyB]

Well, considering that the entire Hussein family controlled all of Iraq...Don't they immediately connect with each other?

Getting rid of the Husseins was in its self not a bad thing but you have persistently overlooked the aftermath which is gradually turning out worse for Iraqi's than had he been left there.

You're right. The United States should have stayed in Vietnam to finish the job. Here's what makes this country so great...We know we should have stayed in, and that's why we are staying in Iraq to help reconstruct. We LEARNED from our mistake.

Umm well then I wont mention Somalia.

Once again, you are correct. But, do you think the decsion to go into Iraq and help promote a free nation where people are able to do what they please was wrong? Do you think we ought to have left well enough alone like mmarsh? Should we have just let human beings suffer under the rule of a cruel tyrant? "Never leave a man behind."

Nope it the absolutely right thing to do, pity it wasnt the reason you did it in the first place and infact is just a convienient excuse for all the other reasons that turned out to be false.
As for letting human beings suffer well no offence but thats the biggest crock I have heard yet, there are other countries ruled by crazed despots that are perfectly safe from US involvement or are secure because they are "pro-us", for myself and most of the world to realise Iraq was simply an easy target.

So, once again, I ask you, do you believe that the choice to liberate a nation was wrong?

In this case yes it was the wrong thing to do simply because the result has made the world a far less secure place because while Iraq may be "free" the Iraqi people are still not and on top of this you have created one of the most effective terrorist training and recruitment centre on earth and the sadest part of this is that pretty much everyone told you so before it started.

 

[Senior Chief]

The question is would they have happened at all if you had stayed out?
Now I have no doubt that the family Hussein were a bunch of crazed lunatics who sorely needed a bullet to balance their views but as to whether the rest of Iraq needed the mess thats been created is open to argument.



I dont want to be the messenger here but too late its a message the world has known since Vietnam.



Good for you but being a "patriot" doesnt make you right.



Now we get the bit that makes you scary because I too believe in my country but I am also prepared to make my voice heard when I believe we are wrong and to do otherwise is in part a sign of a poor democratic ideal.

You are woefully confused about alot of things. I'd like to sit and discuss this with you but as a non-American your viewpoint is not pertinent to the conversation going on here.

To discuss something else you know little of, what happens when your country is attacked by Terrorists because you have ties to the U.S.? When you are attacked for the sake of hatred, come back and discuss how you feel about it.

 

[MontyB]

You are woefully confused about alot of things. I'd like to sit and discuss this with you but as a non-American your viewpoint is not pertinent to the conversation going on here.

To discuss something else you know little of, what happens when your country is attacked by Terrorists because you have ties to the U.S.? When you are attacked for the sake of hatred, come back and discuss how you feel about it.

Haha wonderfully condesending and somewhat ill informed reply there, but perhaps that explains a lot as well.

 

[Rob Henderson]

Getting rid of the Husseins was in its self not a bad thing but you have persistently overlooked the aftermath which is gradually turning out worse for Iraqi's than had he been left there.

Thats a matter of perspective. Many believe that the news has shown only the bad news because, as has been said before, bad news sells. I think this is an accurate statement because I know from Jon's letters that the Iraqi's ARE making progress. The aftermath of our invasion can only be better than what Saddam Hussein would have done to Iraq.

Umm well then I wont mention Somalia.

I'm ill-informed on Somalia, except the nun that was murdered in responce to the Pope's comments. So, I won't pretend to know what I'm talking about and argue with you over it.

Nope it the absolutely right thing to do, pity it wasnt the reason you did it in the first place and infact is just a convienient excuse for all the other reasons that turned out to be false.
As for letting human beings suffer well no offence but thats the biggest crock I have heard yet, there are other countries ruled by crazed despots that are perfectly safe from US involvement or are secure because they are "pro-us", for myself and most of the world to realise Iraq was simply an easy target.

True, it wasn't the primary reason we invaded, but it WAS a reason. President Bush is a human, just like you. Just like me. He made a mistake. And I'm sure it wasn't just him. His information source could have been corrupt...Any number of things could have lead to the misinterpretation of the idea of there being chemical weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Now, human beings suffering...Are you perhaps a bioethicist? Do you believe in the destruction of deformed, chronically ill, terminally ill, just so others can lead fuller lives? Human suffering is HUMANITIES problem...Do you honestly think every human's life was just peachy over there? Unfortunately, there is some truth in your statements. The United States has not the resources available to fight the entire GWOT alone. When other countries wise up to the fact that we DON'T have those resources...Then maybe we can finally do some damage to that effective training ground.

In this case yes it was the wrong thing to do simply because the result has made the world a far less secure place because while Iraq may be "free" the Iraqi people are still not and on top of this you have created one of the most effective terrorist training and recruitment centre on earth and the sadest part of this is that pretty much everyone told you so before it started.

Like I said. Once the rest of the Global War On Terror starts to lean in favor of the free, Iraq will be on top, all other countries will be better off, and arguements like this won't happen anymore.

 

[Senior Chief]

Haha wonderfully condesending and somewhat ill informed reply there, but perhaps that explains a lot as well.

Insults like this usually draw ire from the moderators. I would be careful if I were you.

Now, after your country has been attacked by terrorists for the sake of hatred we can talk.

 

[MontyB]

Insults like this usually draw ire from the moderators. I would be careful if I were you.

Now, after your country has been attacked by terrorists for the sake of hatred we can talk.

Can I talk after say half my families home country was attacked by terrorists?
Seriously at which point am I allowed an opinion as right now it appears you only accept opinions that agree with yours as far as the moderators go I am sure they get in touch if need be but I dont think I have crossed any lines in pointing out the tone of your message.

 

[Senior Chief]

Can I talk after say half my families home country was attacked by terrorists?
Seriously at which point am I allowed an opinion as right now it appears you only accept opinions that agree with yours as far as the moderators go I am sure they get in touch if need be but I dont think I have crossed any lines in pointing out the tone of your message.

You remain an outsider looking in. Your perspective is canted. Now do yu get the point?

 

[Rob Henderson]

*Sigh* And my rational, non-personal post is comlpetely ignored.

 

[sandy]

Eliminating hussein was good.
But for example,after fall of baghdad us didn't expend effort　to protect baghdad museum showed occupation policy　was poor and increase terrorist after WAR was over.
Taking soldiers　in small quantity was completely fault,too.
Worsening　security area requested more force and caused circulus vitiosus　of lack of resource.
But totally my view is US should not retreat from Iraq and depend on new Iraqi army・・・・
What's past is past.
Oh,sorry this opinion seems to be Kissingerian？

 

[warhappy100]

But how good is new Iraqi Army can they defend against Iran? I don't think so, Saddam was in a box has since 91 has not really botherd anyone in his neighborhood so why bother going in the first place. Iraq not worth
it just US looking for new oil source since Dem won't open up ANWAR