Iraq

[dark4181]

they hate us becuz we give women rights, becuz we're christian or jewish or atheist, becuz we're richer than them, more technologically advanced... take your pick

 

in the end, it doesn't matter

[gwprod12]

Those could be the reasons, they could not be the reasons, or they could be partially the reason. How are we to know?

 

Then, you're dealing with an amalgam of people and groups that undoubtedly have different reasons.

 

On a side, but somewhat related, note: Iran is, for the most part, described as an evil theocratic society bent on the vaporization of america and israel by nuclear or sub-nuclaer means. But, is that really what it is? Do the Iranians develop nuclear weapons so that they can start throwing them all over the globe? Are the Iranians insane? Whenever there is a lack of evidence to the contrary, it is always most reasonable to assume that an individual, group, or government has reasons behind it's actions. It's reasons may not necessarily be in it's best interests, but they are perceived to be.

 

So, with that example, in order to understand the motives of, say, Al-qaeda, one must look at their goals (which arent clear), then look to see whether or not their methods are directed towards those goals. A goal without a method of achievement isnt much of a goal.

 

So, let's assume that Al-Qaeda's number one goal is to destroy the united states. What methods might they use to destroy the United States? They cannot kill every american, or even most. They cannot conquer our country. They can bog us down in fighting a pointless war until we end up in bleak military and economic ruin. They can cause us to destroy our credibility abroad. They can cause us to live in fear, and causes us to give up the founding principles. What else can they do, to destroy us? (assuming that's their goal).

 

Quite honestly, from my perspective, Al-Qaeda has gotten quite a bargain with this administration.

 

Another thing is, what makes us honestly think that Al-Qaeda hates us? If Al-Qaeda must hate us, otherwise it wouldnt have attacked our country, then why is that not true for us. Do we hate Iraqis?

[killbot1000]

I'm just sick and tired of every middle eastern activity getting the sticker of "terrorist" on it because ignorant people don't know the difference...

[oregano]

well, it was probably a bad idea to invade iraq, considering they are now on the verge of civil war, but we did liberate them from a genocidal dictator

bush is stupid, ill admit it, but there were some legitimate reasons for the war

 

but now it is the iraqis choice--lay down your arms and establish a fair and equal government, or fight a civil war (between the sunnis and the shiites)

i think we all know what the better choice is, but that idea may seem too far fetched for some iraqis

 

some iraqis just cant deal with the foreign idea of democracy, and wont accept it

its not necessarily a bad thing, but if people are being killled because of it, then it is

[gwprod12]

In 23 years of power, Saddam Hussein caused, through war with his neighbours or being a ruthless dictator, almost 1 million Iraqi deaths.

 

In 3 years, the US, through bombings or causing civil war in Iraq, has caused the deaths of almost 600,000.

 

In 1.7 more years, we will have surpassed Saddam as bloodiest tyrant of Iraq.

 

FYI.

 

EDIT: To reiterate. On average, during Saddam's watch, ~44,000 people died every year in Iraq through violence. On average, during the US/Coalition's watch, ~200,000 people have died every year in Iraq through violence.

[oregano]

no, that is wrong

 

the u.s. has definately not killed 600,000 people

what the iraqis do, we can not control

imagine if sadam got as bad as hitler??? that would be terrible

it was good we came in and stopped some terrible genocide

[killbot1000]

they hate us becuz we give women rights, becuz we're christian or jewish or atheist, becuz we're richer than them, more technologically advanced... take your pick

 

in the end, it doesn't matter

 

 

I really like how you have all the answers...(sarcasm).

 

It does matter quite a bit, if we can dig away at the root cause, we can work to solve it, and hence stop terrorism (or reduce it) without going into the firey pits of debt hell and having our freedoms taken away...

 

So far (despite what some people may think) we are no better at preventing terrorism today than we were 7 years ago, terrorist attacks are rare in this country and they will continue to be rare for years to come, that is, unless we start flaunting our army around the world irresponsibly, acting arrogant and superior, then I think we'll see those terrorist attacks shoot right up...

 

no, that is wrong

 

the u.s. has definately not killed 600,000 people

what the iraqis do, we can not control

imagine if sadam got as bad as hitler??? that would be terrible

it was good we came in and stopped some terrible genocide

 

Yes, but were the ones who put him in power...so really what he did is in a way, kind of our fault...we didnt stop him...we just cleaned up our own mess, something even an 8 year old can do...

[dark4181]

not answers. merely my opinion. it doesn't matter because you'll likely never find a muslim extremist that's willing to sit down and have a civilized discussion. so you're not likely to discover the root cause..

[oregano]

Yes, but were the ones who put him in power...so really what he did is in a way, kind of our fault...we didnt stop him...we just cleaned up our own mess, something even an 8 year old can do...

 

i dont think 8 year olds can clean up their own mess very well

and yes, we did put him in power, but we obviously didnt expect him to start mass murdering kurds

 

not answers. merely my opinion. it doesn't matter because you'll likely never find a muslim extremist that's willing to sit down and have a civilized discussion.

 

that may not be completely true, but it is possible

i wouldnt say they arent civilized, id say they have beliefs that are unncecessary

[gwprod12]

Saddam Hussein didnt "mass murder" the Kurds. The Kurds tried to rebel and break off from Iraq, and Saddam Hussein put down their rebellion. He did use chemical weapons, but he was doing what any dictator/monarch/tyrant would do.

[PimpMyMac]

but there were some legitimate reasons for the war

 

Which ones? WMDs? To promote Democracy in the Middle East? To get rid of Saddam? Who, back in the day, was an instrument of the US government for at least 40 years. To fight insurgents? To fight the newly created terrorist stronghold? Or.. as Mr. Bush stated on August 31st, to protect the oil fields?

 

Al-Qaeda knows that it can't defeat America on it's own soil, but Mr. Bush's policy is providing exactly what Al-Qaeda needs in the long run.

 

Anyways. We can't just use the old "pull out and pray" technique, just because we didn't go into the situation prepared. The democratic dream was stillborn in Iraq long before it's conception. It's not something the people are willing to die for, and they can't get beyond the current religious vacuum of violence. If you want to curb terrorism in Iraq and worldwide, you need to improve the quality of life for the people living at the bottom; health, education, jobs, dreams, etc. What do you expect people to do when they believe they have nothing to lose or gain; extremism feeds off the misery of others.

[gwprod12]

I firmly agree. It is beyond Al-qaeda's capability to destroy our people, our nation or our way of life. Fortunately for Osama Bin Laden, there's Bush to do that for him.

[killbot1000]

I firmly agree. It is beyond Al-qaeda's capability to destroy our people, our nation or our way of life. Fortunately for Osama Bin Laden, there's Bush to do that for him.

 

Seriously, I hope somebody next term can undue all the damage thats been done by him...

[Proteo]

Cut and Run, the Only Brave Thing to Do ...a letter from Michael Moore

 

http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php?id=202

[wildcat69410]

Cut and Run, the Only Brave Thing to Do ...a letter from Michael Moore

 

Whatever credibility that option had before, just dropped heavily. That man is a moron. Even Democrats try to stray away from him now.

[Proteo]

Is your right to think whatever you want about the man. But I've read the article and I agree 100% with him. He seems smarter and much better informed than many of your opinion leaders.

[gwprod12]

Michael Moore is phleghmatic, not stupid.

[killbot1000]

I think hes annoying, but he isnt stupid, he definately has some good points on many issues, and hes well informed...

[gwprod12]

Speaking of morons... anyone seen Anne Coulter?

[oregano]

i think we totally screwed up

 

if we are going to invade a country, we should go in full force, with tons of troops, scare the {censored} out of everyone so that we dont get a bunch of terrorists, and then we rebuild

but instead we're being pansies and rebuilding while sorta fighting with a few troops and everything we rebuild just gets blown up

 

we need to be agressive if we want this war to end

[gwprod12]

There's no point in fighting a war unless you have 1) a clear enemy 2) a clear goal and 3) the stomach to pound your enemy into absolute submission. Anything else is asking for failure.

[oregano]

well, there was a dictator there

and its too late now to back out

i just think we need to be more aggressive if we want to finish this war with not too many american casualties or too much debt

[gwprod12]

Look at it this way. If launching nuclear weapons against your enemy is a real option, then the war is worth fighting. If not, it's not. This limits war to fighting off an invader or someone who has nuclear weapons pointed at you. Iraq was neither. Going to war over a resource that we shouldnt even be using anyways is just asinine.

[oregano]

i agree, the war was a stupid mistake

 

but just because iraq doesnt have nukes doesnt mean there werent other problems

there was a fricking geoncide there in the 90s

[gwprod12]

+retracted+

Edited December 14, 2006 by gwprod12