Poll: Iraqis back attacks on U.S. troops

2

Comments

  • RainDog
    RainDog Posts: 1,824
    reborncareerist wrote:
    You could try responding to what I wrote earlier ... I admitted that the U.S. had a destabilzing influence. But unless you already have underlying problems, an occupation should not produce this amount of civilian on civilian religious violence. The U.S. was the catalyst, sure. But years under Saddam Hussein laid the important groundwork for what is happening now.
    Isn't that the same Hussein that the U.S. ......... oh, nevermind.
  • TheVoiceInside
    TheVoiceInside Posts: 361
    reborncareerist wrote:
    Too bad you feel that way ... I stand by it. Personally, I think blaming Americans for everything is also arrogant, myopic, and ignorant, but that doesn't stop 80% of this board from doing just that.


    Well America is the only superpower left. They control the world and every action they take has consequences. sometimes their good sometimes their bad. And they should take responsability when they screw up.
  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    TheVoiceInside wrote:
    Well America is the only superpower left. They control the world and every action they take has consrquences. sometimes their good sometimes their bad. And they should take responsability when they screw up.

    And I agree! But why attack my statement? What, the U.S. is the sole cause of all religious hatred in the world? Such a view is ridiculous. The situation in Iraq is more complex than one simple factor like U.S. troops on Iraqi soil.
  • stupidcorporatewhore
    stupidcorporatewhore Posts: 761
    jeffbr wrote:
    It takes no critical thinking to blame the US for the world's problems.

    So the US is guilty of nothing? Not that I'm saying that you are saying that, but when you guys use words like "all" and "everything" you are kind of implying that everyone is wrong for focusing on the bad things we are guilty of....

    ....like invading and occpying Iraq, sparking a civil war and all the violence that goes along with it.

    It's a very simple equasion: we don't go into iraq=hundreds of thousands of people still alive.
  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    RainDog wrote:
    Isn't that the same Hussein that the U.S. ......... oh, nevermind.

    The U.S. didn't put Saddam Hussein in power. If I didn't know you better, I'd chastise you for adding to the ignorance level.
  • RainDog
    RainDog Posts: 1,824
    reborncareerist wrote:
    The U.S. didn't put Saddam Hussein in power. If I didn't know you better, I'd chastise you for adding to the ignorance level.
    Didn't put, no. But we have a bit of a conundrum here. The Iraqis who hated Saddam remember who helped him back in the day, and the people who supported Saddam remember who took him out. And then there's the people who just don't like the U.S. So while there are people who hate the U.S. anyway, to say that a large portion of the population doesn't have a legitimate beef with us isn't quite right. And to say that we aren't largely (not fully, mind you) responsible, well - if I didn't know you better.....
  • stupidcorporatewhore
    stupidcorporatewhore Posts: 761
    reborncareerist wrote:
    The U.S. didn't put Saddam Hussein in power.

    True, but you are also cherry picking. You don't get far as a leader of a non nuke country if you don't bow to the US.
  • negationist
    negationist Posts: 237
    Did anyone know that during Sadam Husseins reign, literacy rates were close to 100% and there was free healthcare for all citizens of Iraq. Tell me what the state of literacy and healthcare in Iraq is now?
    If Pearl Jam was a beer, they'd probably be the best beer in the world!!
  • inmytree
    inmytree Posts: 4,741
    reborncareerist wrote:
    You could try responding to what I wrote earlier ... I admitted that the U.S. had a destabilzing influence. But unless you already have underlying problems, an occupation should not produce this amount of civilian on civilian religious violence. The U.S. was the catalyst, sure. But years under Saddam Hussein laid the important groundwork for what is happening now.


    ok...I'll try...

    yes, the US destabilized Iraq, we agree on that...however, I think where we may differ is this: the US had no plan for what to do after the removal of Saddam...I feel if you are going to break something, you should be prepared to fix it...you see, what is going on now is a horrible, i.e. blaming the Iraqi people for the results of a war forced upon them...the US broke Iraq, with no plan to fix Iraq, therefore, they (meaning those who pushed for, supported, created, had part it) should fix it...I read a quote somewhere, "you got us in, how are you going to get us out"...one has to admit, "stay the course" is not a plan...therefore, "more of the same" is not going to get it done...

    how's that...?
  • inmytree
    inmytree Posts: 4,741
    jeffbr wrote:
    It takes no critical thinking to blame the US for the world's problems.


    I would say it does...to step outside of what one has been taught, to seriously look at one's own country and the choices of it's leaders takes critical thinking...

    lapping up everything the powers-that-be say, not asking questions, not seek accountalbility is the easy and simple way out...
  • bryanfury
    bryanfury Posts: 461
    winning the hearts and minds...
    those undecided, needn't have faith to be free
  • Abuskedti
    Abuskedti Posts: 1,917
    reborncareerist wrote:
    So all it takes is the presence of U.S. soldiers to lead to this kind of sectarian violence? I am not talking about attacks on U.S. troops, I am talking about Iraqis killing Iraqis. The sectarian problem in Iraq is not an American creation, and if U.S. troops left, the problem would probably get even worse.

    one group of Iraqis would win and take control and it would stop. The problem is that we don't respect Iraq's ability to rule itself. Somehow, we beleive they are better off in this lawless state.
  • jeffbr
    jeffbr Seattle Posts: 7,177
    inmytree wrote:
    I would say it does...to step outside of what one has been taught, to seriously look at one's own country and the choices of it's leaders takes critical thinking...

    lapping up everything the powers-that-be say, not asking questions, not seek accountalbility is the easy and simple way out...

    Your first paragraph sounds good. I just don't think that is what happens. At least not with the majority of lefty posters on the MT. In the end it always comes down to the US blame game as silly assertions in this thread have shown (ex. no toture in Iraq before the US invasion). I agree with your second paragraph as well.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • even flow?
    even flow? Posts: 8,066
    They actually back the attacks on US forces? Whoa! Isn't that like taking a poll of Yanks on 912 and seeing if they want to discuss the world policies? Instead of their other option. I can't imagine how the Iraqi people feel this way.
    You've changed your place in this world!
  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    Abuskedti wrote:
    one group of Iraqis would win and take control and it would stop. The problem is that we don't respect Iraq's ability to rule itself. Somehow, we beleive they are better off in this lawless state.

    This point is worth thinking about ...
  • bryanfury
    bryanfury Posts: 461
    even flow? wrote:
    They actually back the attacks on US forces? Whoa! Isn't that like taking a poll of Yanks on 912 and seeing if they want to discuss the world policies? Instead of their other option. I can't imagine how the Iraqi people feel this way.

    i think herein lies the problem. people can't understand how the iraqis feel this way. the fact is, they do! Its kind of like how we can't understand how anyone couldn't like pearl jam.

    our campaign of winning the hearts and minds has obviously failed, along with this entire war plan. If we haven't convinced them by now, we never will. We need to take their opinions into accoutn when we talk about the future of our involvement there.
    those undecided, needn't have faith to be free
  • rebornFixer
    rebornFixer Posts: 4,901
    inmytree wrote:
    ok...I'll try...

    yes, the US destabilized Iraq, we agree on that...however, I think where we may differ is this: the US had no plan for what to do after the removal of Saddam...I feel if you are going to break something, you should be prepared to fix it...you see, what is going on now is a horrible, i.e. blaming the Iraqi people for the results of a war forced upon them...the US broke Iraq, with no plan to fix Iraq, therefore, they (meaning those who pushed for, supported, created, had part it) should fix it...I read a quote somewhere, "you got us in, how are you going to get us out"...one has to admit, "stay the course" is not a plan...therefore, "more of the same" is not going to get it done...

    how's that...?

    I agree that the "exit plan", such that it is, is not very good. Again, though ... The sectarian violence does not exist because of a bad exit plan. I have no problems blaming the U.S. for PART of the mess. A big part. Maybe I should have made that clear from the beginning. But at some point, the Iraqis are going to have to stop killing one another. Maybe Abuskedti is right, and that point can only come after the U.S. leaves.
  • inmytree
    inmytree Posts: 4,741
    jeffbr wrote:
    Your first paragraph sounds good. I just don't think that is what happens. At least not with the majority of lefty posters on the MT. In the end it always comes down to the US blame game as silly assertions in this thread have shown (ex. no toture in Iraq before the US invasion). I agree with your second paragraph as well.

    I have to agree with you, as well...there are people on both sides, who have extreme views, beliefs, and perceptions of what has happend, is happening, and what should happen from here...I would have to say, though, I do have to disagree with use of the word "majority" and "always"...I would say that the majority of those on the MT, who lean to left are fair and seek to see both sides...and there are some on the right who do the same...
  • RockinInCanada
    RockinInCanada Posts: 2,016
    Abuskedti wrote:
    one group of Iraqis would win and take control and it would stop. The problem is that we don't respect Iraq's ability to rule itself. Somehow, we beleive they are better off in this lawless state.

    Yeah but America does not want that b/c if they leave I for one believe that the group that takes power will be very anti-American.....therefore regardless what the USA does it is a lose-lose in my opinion...but as a nation the leaders should take responsiiblity for what their creation has turned into.....plus to not consider the hostility of rival sects that are present in Iraq is pure idiotic especially from those running the country...this problem was well stated before the war...and to say it was not means you were not listening b/c I sure heard it.....the US is not to blame for everything but they indirectly got this going and should prepare for the fallback......which is another regime in Iraq with higher anti-American sentiments than before.....which I hope does not occur but at the present rate I wouldnt be surprised....
  • citizen_drew
    citizen_drew Posts: 170
    _Three-fourths say they think the United States plans to keep military bases in Iraq permanently..

    Well they got this part right. Baghdad could look like Irvine and we'll still be there...

Categories