A Question for War Supporters

SoonForgotten2

I have an honest question to ask anyone who supports the US led occupation of Iraq, especially thouse who do believe we need to "stay the course".

Given that the situation has deteriorated so badly and that the US military is now stretched so thin, why would you not enlist your services? What speaks against your doing so if you support these actions and want to see "good" prevail?

DeLukin

Aside from your rediculous point that anyone who supports the war should enlist in the US armed forces, your original question is a good one. I guess my answer would be: until someone comes up with a GOOD alternate solution to Western troops being in Iraq, I would support staying the course. If we left now what would happen? Would an even worse regime than Saddam's take power, hell bent on acquiring nuclear arms to use on Western countries? Would it become a safe haven for terrorists to train openly and obtain resources to carry out more terror attacks? What would happen to the Iraqi people who, although things aren't great for them now, would be caught in the middle of all this? I guess until a better solution is offered, the only answer for me is to stay the course. I don't like it, but it's probably the best option at this point.

Byrnzie

DeLukin wrote:

Would an even worse regime than Saddam's take power,

It already has - the only difference being that Sadaam had power, whereas the present incumbents haven't got a fucking clue. Anaylsts agree that the situation in Iraq today is worse than it was under Sadaam regarding violence and torture.

NCfan

Byrnzie wrote:

It already has - the only difference being that Sadaam had power, whereas the present incumbents haven't got a fucking clue. Anaylsts agree that the situation in Iraq today is worse than it was under Sadaam regarding violence and torture.

With all of your un-biased infinite knowledge and wisdom - why don't you address the above point: That leaving Iraq would just create an oportunity for terrorist and Islamic extremist to gain control and resources of a nation-state, and use that as a platform to strengthen their ranks and launch more attacks against the west. Can you answer that please?

DeLukin

Yea, that's my dilemma. I don't like the war, but what's the alternative? I think we can all agree that war sucks but would leaving now keep my kids safer? I don't think so...

Byrnzie

NCfan wrote:

With all of your un-biased infinite knowledge and wisdom - why don't you address the above point: That leaving Iraq would just create an oportunity for terrorist and Islamic extremist to gain control and resources of a nation-state, and use that as a platform to strengthen their ranks and launch more attacks against the west. Can you answer that please?

Your point is sheer hypothesis. All I'll say on the matter is: Your Government created the mess. Now deal with it.

SoonForgotten2

DeLukin wrote:

Aside from your rediculous point that anyone who supports the war should enlist in the US armed forces, your original question is a good one. I guess my answer would be: until someone comes up with a GOOD alternate solution to Western troops being in Iraq, I would support staying the course. If we left now what would happen? Would an even worse regime than Saddam's take power, hell bent on acquiring nuclear arms to use on Western countries? Would it become a safe haven for terrorists to train openly and obtain resources to carry out more terror attacks? What would happen to the Iraqi people who, although things aren't great for them now, would be caught in the middle of all this? I guess until a better solution is offered, the only answer for me is to stay the course. I don't like it, but it's probably the best option at this point.

I never said that they should enlist. I only want to know why they would not want to enlist. If you feel that it is necessary and/or possible to win this war, I'm just curious as to why people would choose to stay on the sidelines while others risk their lives for the cause.

NCfan

Byrnzie wrote:

Your point is sheer hypothesis. All I'll say on the matter is: Your Government created the mess. Now deal with it.

That's a fantastic answer. Here's a follow-up for you. Why would Iraq NOT become a safe-haven and base for terrorist if we left? What indicates that terrorist and Islamic extremist would not want to be in Iraq if we left? As people like to point out, they weren't there until we showed up. If we left, do you think they would to? Do you think they have no interest in the future of that country?

Byrnzie

I believe Americans needed something like this to happen. Or worse - and the worse may yet be to come. You needed it to shake you out of your lethargy regarding your corrupt Government. I wanted Bush to get back into power at the last election because I think America needs a cracker warmonger to drag your country into deep shit, to the point where you'll be forced to embark on a complete overhaul of your Government. The way things stand at the moment, there's absolutely no democracy to speak of. Just a choice between two businessmen who care only about pleasing the 1% of the rich and powerful. The way things stand, the whole system is rotten to the core. The way i see it, things need to get worse before they can get better.

old and in the way

Byrnzie wrote:

Your point is sheer hypothesis. All I'll say on the matter is: Your Government created the mess. Now deal with it.

It's not just sheer hypothesis when it is a stated goal of the extremists. It also seems pretty easy for you to ignore the alignment and sacrifices of your own citizens.

Byrnzie

NCfan wrote:

That's a fantastic answer. Here's a follow-up for you. Why would Iraq NOT become a safe-haven and base for terrorist if we left? What indicates that terrorist and Islamic extremist would not want to be in Iraq if we left? As people like to point out, they weren't there until we showed up. If we left, do you think they would to? Do you think they have no interest in the future of that country?

You seem to not understand that you are fighting a popular uprising. Sure, there are factions there fighting amongst themselves. Ultimately though, Americans are not wanted in Iraq. You can pretend that you are fighting Al Queda there if you like. You can even pretend that every Iraqi that fights the American occupation is a terrorist. The fact is, you need to get out. If your worried about them building nuclear weapons when you leave then use your satellites to spy on them. The same ones that Colin Powell used before the invasion to convince the public that a lorry was a weapon of mass destruction and a threat to America. You make it sound like obtaining a nuclear weapon is as simple as buying a colt 45 at your local hardware store.

miller8966

Byrnzie wrote:

You seem to not understand that you are fighting a popular uprising. Sure, there are factions there fighting amongst themselves. Ultimately though, Americans are not wanted in Iraq. You can pretend that you are fighting Al Queda there if you like. You can even pretend that every Iraqi that fights the American occupation is a terrorist. The fact is, you need to get out. If your worried about them building nuclear weapons when you leave then use your satellites to spy on them. The same ones that Colin Powell used before the invasion to convince the public that a lorry was a weapon of mass destruction and a threat to America. You make it sound like obtaining a nuclear weapon is as simple as buying a colt 45 at your local hardware store.

I think we should get out and let them have a civil war. Not before stealing their oil though so i can fill up my big SUV...

jlew24asu

Byrnzie wrote:

I believe Americans needed something like this to happen. Or worse - and the worse may yet be to come. You needed it to shake you out of your lethargy regarding your corrupt Government. I wanted Bush to get back into power at the last election because I think America needs a cracker warmonger to drag your country into deep shit, to the point where you'll be forced to embark on a complete overhaul of your Government. The way things stand at the moment, there's absolutely no democracy to speak of. Just a choice between two businessmen who care only about pleasing the 1% of the rich and powerful. The way things stand, the whole system is rotten to the core. The way i see it, things need to get worse before they can get better.

it just amazes me how people from other countries seem to know exactly what is going on in America.

absolutely no democracy to speak of? wow those are bold words.

Byrnzie

old and in the way wrote:

It's not just sheer hypothesis when it is a stated goal of the extremists. It also seems pretty easy for you to ignore the alignment and sacrifices of your own citizens.

I'm not ignoring the alignment of Tony Balir and a couple of others within the British Goverment with the Bush Administration. I understand perfectly well that Blair has reduced this country to a poodle of the U.S. However, the power, and influence lays on your side of the pond. Hence my aiming the brunt of my criticism westwards.

Byrnzie

jlew24asu wrote:

it just amazes me how people from other countries seem to know exactly what is going on in America.

It's called education. Try it sometime.

DeLukin

Byrnzie wrote:

I believe Americans needed something like this to happen. Or worse - and the worse may yet be to come. You needed it to shake you out of your lethargy regarding your corrupt Government. I wanted Bush to get back into power at the last election because I think America needs a cracker warmonger to drag your country into deep shit, to the point where you'll be forced to embark on a complete overhaul of your Government. The way things stand at the moment, there's absolutely no democracy to speak of. Just a choice between two businessmen who care only about pleasing the 1% of the rich and powerful. The way things stand, the whole system is rotten to the core. The way i see it, things need to get worse before they can get better.

We already HAD something like this happen - it was called the Vietnam war. And it didn't do much to solve the corruption in our Government. An speaking of Gov'ts that need complete overhauls, how's the Queen these days? I'm sure I don't have to remind you about Tony Blair's involvement in supporting the war in Iraq and the blood on your Gov't hands. It's pointless to insult eachother's respective countries - Iraq is a mess and needs to be fixed. Do you have any suggestions besides anarchy to fix it? THAT would be a good thread. This one is pointless.

NCfan

SoonForgotten2 wrote:

I never said that they should enlist. I only want to know why they would not want to enlist. If you feel that it is necessary and/or possible to win this war, I'm just curious as to why people would choose to stay on the sidelines while others risk their lives for the cause.

Probably because of the same reason you don't go to Iraq to fight against us.

NCfan

Byrnzie wrote:

You seem to not understand that you are fighting a popular uprising. Sure, there are factions there fighting amongst themselves. Ultimately though, Americans are not wanted in Iraq. You can pretend that you are fighting Al Queda there if you like. You can even pretend that every Iraqi that fights the American occupation is a terrorist. The fact is, you need to get out. If your worried about them building nuclear weapons when you leave then use your satellites to spy on them. The same ones that Colin Powell used before the invasion to convince the public that a lorry was a weapon of mass destruction and a threat to America. You make it sound like obtaining a nuclear weapon is as simple as buying a colt 45 at your local hardware store.

I don't think anybody is prentending that we are fighting Al Qaida in Iraq. I'm pretty sure that is really happening. I also don't think anybody is prentending that every Iraqi who fights the American occupation is a terrorist either.

Who said anything about nuclear weapons? Is that your best attempt to answer my questions? You're a detriment to your own side my friend.

Abuskedti

If we leave Iraq - they will battle for power and lead their country where they would like to.

That is a good thing...

jlew24asu

Abuskedti wrote:

If we leave Iraq - they will battle for power and lead their country where they would like to.

That is a good thing...

they are doing that already even as we are there. all we are doing is providing more boots on the ground and some level of security. they are fighting each other. is a sunni saying....Look at that damn american, I'm gonna go blow up a shiite!

leaving today would send the country into further turmoil. thats a bad thing. there have to be timelines set based on goals set and accomplished

NCfan

Abuskedti wrote:

If we leave Iraq - they will battle for power and lead their country where they would like to.

That is a good thing...

Even if that leads to another regime the likes of Mullah controlled Iran, Sharia law of Saudi Arabia, another dictator like Mubarak, Assad or Saddam, a puppet state of Iran like lebanon or the former Taliban regime in Afghanistan? Would that be acceptable to you if that happened?

The fact of the matter is this... Everybody has interest in Iraq, not just the U.S. Iran wants to influence the direction of the country and so do Islamic fundamentalist. What TRUE Iraqi citizens want will not happen unless order is restored, becuase they are too fragmented and hold little military power to determine their own destiny. For better or worse, the U.S. represents the interest of all freedom-loving, democratic nations of the world. We have been the only group out of all the different factions in Iraq that has tried to create peace, hold elections so the voice of Iraqi's could be heard and realized. Why is it that WE are the ones who need to leave and forfeit our influence? Should we be so niave as to think that if the U.S. would give up our interest that so would Iran, Syria and other Islamic fundamentalist?

Byrnzie

NCfan wrote:

IWho said anything about nuclear weapons? Is that your best attempt to answer my questions? You're a detriment to your own side my friend.

DeLukin did.

DeLukin wrote:

Would an even worse regime than Saddam's take power, hell bent on acquiring nuclear arms to use on Western countries?

jlew24asu

NCfan wrote:

Even if that leads to another regime the likes of Mullah controlled Iran, Sharia law of Saudi Arabia, another dictator like Mubarak, Assad or Saddam, a puppet state of Iran like lebanon or the former Taliban regime in Afghanistan? Would that be acceptable to you if that happened?

The fact of the matter is this... Everybody has interest in Iraq, not just the U.S. Iran wants to influence the direction of the country and so do Islamic fundamentalist. What TRUE Iraqi citizens want will not happen unless order is restored, becuase they are too fragmented and hold little military power to determine their own destiny. For better or worse, the U.S. represents the interest of all freedom-loving, democratic nations of the world. We have been the only group out of all the different factions in Iraq that has tried to create peace, hold elections so the voice of Iraqi's could be heard and realized. Why is it that WE are the ones who need to leave and forfeit our influence? Should we be so niave as to think that if the U.S. would give up our interest that so would Iran, Syria and other Islamic fundamentalist?

you said it alot better then I did. i'm not awake yet. long night last night.

Dirty Mosquito

DeLukin wrote:

Yea, that's my dilemma. I don't like the war, but what's the alternative? I think we can all agree that war sucks but would leaving now keep my kids safer? I don't think so...

IMO, your kids and all of our kids are less safer because of the war in the first place. We have alienated and made more enemies now than we had when Saddam was in power. Though I disagree with the war, I am happy Saddam is no longer in power, I just hope America can clean up their mess.

old and in the way

NCfan wrote:

Even if that leads to another regime the likes of Mullah controlled Iran, Sharia law of Saudi Arabia, another dictator like Mubarak, Assad or Saddam, a puppet state of Iran like lebanon or the former Taliban regime in Afghanistan? Would that be acceptable to you if that happened?

The fact of the matter is this... Everybody has interest in Iraq, not just the U.S. Iran wants to influence the direction of the country and so do Islamic fundamentalist. What TRUE Iraqi citizens want will not happen unless order is restored, becuase they are too fragmented and hold little military power to determine their own destiny. For better or worse, the U.S. represents the interest of all freedom-loving, democratic nations of the world. We have been the only group out of all the different factions in Iraq that has tried to create peace, hold elections so the voice of Iraqi's could be heard and realized. Why is it that WE are the ones who need to leave and forfeit our influence? Should we be so niave as to think that if the U.S. would give up our interest that so would Iran, Syria and other Islamic fundamentalist?

Well thought out and stated my friend, that is why three members of my family have contributed.

Abuskedti

jlew24asu wrote:

they are doing that already even as we are there. all we are doing is providing more boots on the ground and some level of security. they are fighting each other. is a sunni saying....Look at that damn american, I'm gonna go blow up a shiite!

leaving today would send the country into further turmoil. thats a bad thing. there have to be timelines set based on goals set and accomplished

No they are not.. they are resisting the government we designed for them and our presence.

Why do you think that our imposed government is what they want.. We have chosen a side to protect. Obviously they are not happy with it.

the conclusion that they are stupid and violent is designed to cover up the fact that we created this mess.

Abuskedti

NCfan wrote:

Even if that leads to another regime the likes of Mullah controlled Iran, Sharia law of Saudi Arabia, another dictator like Mubarak, Assad or Saddam, a puppet state of Iran like lebanon or the former Taliban regime in Afghanistan? Would that be acceptable to you if that happened?

The fact of the matter is this... Everybody has interest in Iraq, not just the U.S. Iran wants to influence the direction of the country and so do Islamic fundamentalist. What TRUE Iraqi citizens want will not happen unless order is restored, becuase they are too fragmented and hold little military power to determine their own destiny. For better or worse, the U.S. represents the interest of all freedom-loving, democratic nations of the world. We have been the only group out of all the different factions in Iraq that has tried to create peace, hold elections so the voice of Iraqi's could be heard and realized. Why is it that WE are the ones who need to leave and forfeit our influence? Should we be so niave as to think that if the U.S. would give up our interest that so would Iran, Syria and other Islamic fundamentalist?

I would be happy if we left. There already is an Iran and all the other groups you mention. If Iraq becomes a threat - we have ways of dealing with it.

as of now, all we are doing is maintaining and contributing to violence and division.

jlew24asu

Abuskedti wrote:

No they are not.. they are resisting the government we designed for them and our presence.

Why do you think that our imposed government is what they want.. We have chosen a side to protect. Obviously they are not happy with it.

the conclusion that they are stupid and violent is designed to cover up the fact that we created this mess.

we can agree to disagree.

trappedinmyradio

Abuskedti wrote:

No they are not.. they are resisting the government we designed for them and our presence.

i thought the fight was with terrorists streaming into the regions to try to stop the american machine and our wonderful way of life because they hate us for our freedom...or, was that last month? or, last year? or, was that a rationale for war?

jlew24asu

trappedinmyradio wrote:

i thought the fight was with terrorists streaming into the regions to try to stop the american machine and our wonderful way of life because they hate us for our freedom...or, was that last month? or, last year? or, was that a rationale for war?

that was last year. or maybe 6 months. whenever we killed the leader, el queda in iraq seemed to be less of a threat.

NCfan

Abuskedti wrote:

I would be happy if we left. There already is an Iran and all the other groups you mention. If Iraq becomes a threat - we have ways of dealing with it.

as of now, all we are doing is maintaining and contributing to violence and division.

Wow, that sounds like some pretty sound logic... "There are already countries who threaten Democracy and the Western way of life, so what's the difference if Iraq becomes one too?"

What are our ways of dealing with these countries who threaten us? The U.N. sure isn't going to do anything, if history has been any guide. Other countries aren't going to help the United States bear the burden of protecting democracy and free-market economies, even thought they have enjoyed freedom and prospered finanically thanks to our sacrifices.

We struck a deal with North Korea, and they just turned around and blackmailed us by continuing their nuclear program. The U.N. is proving totally inept at trying to persuade Iran from not developing nuclear weapons.
They couldn't do anything about Saddam violating 17 of their resolutions.

Please tell me what our "options" are? Looks to me like we only have bad choices and worse choices in dealing with these countries. If you know of something I don't, please enlighten me!