The War in Iraq

adorelo

adorelo

CSI Level Two
"The Iraq War, also known as the Occupation of Iraq, the Second Gulf War, or Operation Iraqi Freedom, is an ongoing conflict which began on March 20, 2003 with the United States-led invasion of Iraq." Source - Wikipedia

What are your views on the Iraq war? Pointless? Important? Ambivalent?

Please back up all your views with fact and reasons.

Respect other's opinons and engage in healthy debate not argument.

Thanks,

Jodie :)
 
I don't believe in war, but I also think if we didn't go over there, they would have come here, which would have been even worse. It's like a necessary evil. I also think they've been over there too long and it's time to come home.
 
If they had good reasons to go there, perhaps I'd been more understanding - But they went there with a lie. Even I don't support dictatures and stuff - you just can't make lies and attack another country. BUT - if Bush really believed Saddam had WMD because - well US gave lots of weapons (and training) when Iraq had war against Iran so perhaps they gived some biological weapons as well and thought they'd been developing those.

Would the thoughs about the war be different if Americans would experienced some war on their own soil?

The one thing I won't understand - I've said it before. They (US and its allies) try to bring democracy to Iraq [which is ironic because in many ways you see non-democracy things in US] and modern democracy is pretty much based on Western culture, which is born from Christianity and its believes.

If [for example] some islam country attacked us and forced everyone to obey the islamic rules and take it as a law - would you be pissed?

I think it's sad that they actually thought "oh we go there, get rid of Saddam and come home and everyone is happy" and now they are stuck in there.

But yes, get those americans out of there asap and hopefully they can find government and some peace
 
It has been officially said that they 'went in there without a plan'. They didn't think they would need one. They though, like you said DaWako, "oh we go there, get rid of Saddam and come home and everyone is happy".

Well, didn't that work out well. :rolleyes:

If [for example] some Islam country attacked us and forced everyone to obey the Islamic rules and take it as a law - would you be pissed?
Click to expand...

Yes. Which is why I feel for the innocent Iraqi people. I do however, understand that we as a society could not allow a dictator ship to continue ( like Hitler, Mussolini and the rest). But I also take in to consideration that we maybe could have left the country to deal with it, rather than going in and enforcing our views.

It's a difficult one.

Now don't get me wrong, I am very patriotic to my country, but I think Bush has made mistakes. He made decisions made of false 'facts' and half truths and now he can't admit he was wrong.

Unfortunately, I don't think the war will end anytime soon. I just hope the troops can hold on until it does.
 
This war has definitely gone on for far too long. I get that no one likes to admit defeat, but Bush needs to snap out of it and get the troops home, he's only hurting them.

Now I was pretty young when this all started, so I was hoping someone could clarify this for me. On September 11th Osama Bin Laden arranged for terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. After which, the Americans tried to track him down to punish him. He was from Afghanistan, correct? So he was too good at hiding and they couldn't find him. But then why did Bush suddenly turn his attention to Saddam Husein and the Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq? This might be a stupid question, but like I said, I was young at the time. Any clarification would be appreciated.
 
If I remember right, they found 'connections' between Saddam and bin Laden and the time Bush revealed 'axis of evil' which was Iraq and North Korea and since, because of Afghanista, they were already 'War against terrorism' - they claimed Iraq had WMD and terrorist connections so it must be attacked. Even tho there went Hans Blix and UN troops who said there is no such a thing, they attacked anyways.

Hans Blix has written a book about it, called "Disarming Iraq" - my plans have been that I read it soon.
 
oh, the whole Iraq war was already planned way before 9/11, that was just the excuse to go into the country. I think the US has broken so many international laws and the Geneva conventions so many times anyway, so i guess to them it doesn't matter what they do anymore. You can't just march into a country because you believe they are a threat. That is stupid, that is like putting someone in jail for life because you think they are going to kill someone. The US should also be accountable for those secret CIA camps, in countries where torture is legal. Like where the US government sent a CANADIAN citizen, without any charges, to Syria where he was tortured for information. Torture has been proven to be very ineffective at obtaining correct information. Maybe this explains why there is so much bad intelligence.

They don't want to win this war, they just want permanent US military bases in the country, so they have more control over the governments and the oil.

Frankly I am not all that surprised. I have always viewed the American society as a war loving place. The obsession with guns, the violent society, the fear of social change...

But with all this military power, the US sure does have a hard time winning wars. I guess its because the US government is absolutely clueless about any type of foreign policy. You can have all the weapons in the word, but without a great strategy...you will be screwed.
 
xfcanadian said:
oh, the whole Iraq war was already planned way before 9/11, that was just the excuse to go into the country. I think the US has broken so many international laws and the Geneva conventions so many times anyway, so i guess to them it doesn't matter what they do anymore.

They don't want to win this war, they just want permanent US military bases in the country, so they have more control over the governments and the oil.
Click to expand...

(excuse me for all typos, I use laptop and I am not used to it)

I agree that it was planned already at the 911 attack. But what I said before was 'official' way how it went.
I think Bush had something that he wanted to be like his daddy and attack Iraq or felt that there was some unfinished business from Gulf War. Kind of 'personal reason'

USA basicly wipes its ass with UN. And it's sad.

And yes oil, I forgot that. It's needed in US. I mean look for example the cars. Diesel is almost a swearword in US, you need bigasscar that has HUGE consumption (Hummers and other stuff) - If you go Honda USA - I don't even remember was there diesel version of Honda CR-V? (we have that car and even it's diesel - it's 2.2 TD and I can tell you go fast with that)
Because it's said we'll have oil for only 60 years or so (I've heard Americans have been told that there's oil for next 200 yrs) because, too bad, most of oil is in Middle East and too bad USA is only friends with Saudi-Arabia.
 
xfcanadian said:
But with all this military power, the US sure does have a hard time winning wars.
Click to expand...

Actually, I took an American History course last year (because I was sick of everyone making constant references to it and me being clueless), and I don't think they lost a war until Vietnam. Ever since then they haven't won one, and they have issues admitting defeat, but they used to be good at war. I do agree that they have a love affair with wars though. I actually think it's more of a love affair with inserting themselves in situations that is no business of theirs, but nonetheless it's not good. They claim to be a land of freedom and the greater good and all that, but then they purposely put their citizens in harm's way.

I had heard about the oil thing. And it makes sense. But what doesn't make sense to me is why the American public is letting them just fully forget about why the war got started (yes, I read what you guys said about 9/11 just being an excuse to start an already scheduled war, but I still don't think it's right to ignore what Bin Laden caused). On the news you barely hear about the soliders in Afghanistan. They're risking their lives just like the ones in Iraq, for the same reason...it just doesn't seem right to me.
 
LibertyBell said:


Actually, I took an American History course last year (because I was sick of everyone making constant references to it and me being clueless), and I don't think they lost a war until Vietnam. Ever since then they haven't won one, and they have issues admitting defeat, but they used to be good at war.
Click to expand...

SO basicly they haven't won any wars what THEY*VE started. First WW - they came in the end to support Britain, France and Russia. Winning WW 2 - in a horrible way (I always think it's funny that they were allies with Russia/Soviet Union and still ended up being in Cold War with them)

I mean the lost in Vietnam, Somalia and all - is it attitude problem? I mean, something what I mentioned earlier "We are the most powerful country, we just go there, beat 'em and come home"

Who knows.

So remember when referring to 'wars they've won' that they had BIG countries with them - now they've had UK and some smaller countries.
 
IMHO it´s nonsense to attack a country, because it has WMD. Honestly today every country already has or is at least able to built WMD.

It´s also my attitude that dictators have to be stopped - even if this doesn´t imply executing them in my point of view.

So, US troops stopped Hussein. That is doubtlessly a success. Yet what I wonder is, is there or has there ever been a plan on policy after Sadam?

What after-sadam-plans certainly aim at is bringing democracy to Iraq. However my impression is that in comparison to situation in Iraq today US military-invasion failed successfully.

Finally the civil-war Iraq has now is serious. Yet - if you ask me - US military-strategy really lacks effeciency.
 
^^ Yes they did.

War is a constant. It's getting to be a necessity. No country seems to be able to ensablish itslef properly without a war, and I think that's sad.

And did anyone else find it odd that during the first world war, the majority of the speeches refer to it as 'the first world war' rather than the 'great war'?

How did they know there would be a second?

That's Jodie the conspiricy theorist coming though.
 
xfcanadian said: (...) i don't consider WWI or II victorious in anyway, every side lost a whole lot.
Click to expand...

I think it´s dangerous to think a nation won all its wars so the world fears it. 9/11 clearly showed that nowadays nations don´t hesitate to attack even worldpower´s like USA. :eek:
 
xfcanadian said:
and I don't think they lost a war until Vietnam
Click to expand...

the US lost the war of 1812 ;)
Click to expand...

Er, not really. It was more of a stalemate. We neither lost nor gained anything, although one of the more annoying practices of the British stopped soon after, that of involuntarily impressing American sailors that they came across on the seas.

But that is more due to the Napoleonic Wars, which had more of an immediate impact on England.

We didn't lose both Korea and Vietnam, we were NOT ALLOWED to either wage the wars completely or finish them properly.

Sadly enough, we've had this pattern of Marquis of Queensbury rules since Korea, that war must be fought a certain way, no this, no that and of course, enemies don't fight under such a handicap.

Why a powerful enemy hasn't really whipped our ass as a result of our timidity and stupidity is beyond me. :/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top