Civil War, Their problem or ours?
IMMine2129
Posts: 16
As we all know, the situation in Iraq has ended up being a fight not only between the U.S and terrorist cells, but fights between the Shi'ite and Sunni.
The question is......Is it our problem or theirs? As Americans, do we feel responsible for this and should we stay to prevent it?
Okay thats the question. Please give me your opinions. Heres mine.
We hear complaints about Genocide in Africa all the time, and people say that we have the responsibility to help people out. Well...all that genocide results from situations like what would happen in Iraq, rival sects.
Honestly, lately I could care less what decision is made by the government, I just want them to do it with full force. When you think about it....Alot less of our forces would be killed if we were out of Iraq, and a lot less would be killed if we had more people, more support, and stronger defenses over there. Its this half assed stuff that is hurting us the most.
The question is......Is it our problem or theirs? As Americans, do we feel responsible for this and should we stay to prevent it?
Okay thats the question. Please give me your opinions. Heres mine.
We hear complaints about Genocide in Africa all the time, and people say that we have the responsibility to help people out. Well...all that genocide results from situations like what would happen in Iraq, rival sects.
Honestly, lately I could care less what decision is made by the government, I just want them to do it with full force. When you think about it....Alot less of our forces would be killed if we were out of Iraq, and a lot less would be killed if we had more people, more support, and stronger defenses over there. Its this half assed stuff that is hurting us the most.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Staying won't prevent the civil war it will only involve us. Leaving will reduce the number of targets of violence.
They were fucked up before we got there. We have only exacerbated the problems. They'll still be fucked up whether we leave tomorrow or in 50 years. It will cost less in terms of loss of life and dollars if we leave tomorrow.
That said, someone has to keep the peace, these groups are having a hard time working together...can't blame them with US influence....but its obvious they need to be regulated. A job for which the UN was made, imo.
The US pulls out, the UN moves in.
Most of the terrorist activity in Iraq is a direct result of US presence in the region, they are reacting. Put an international force in to police the state basically and give them time to build a nation, and see how it works out.
But pull US troops out asap, that should be the goal for us.
Most of this is their fault. The U.S. has felt like it has to step up to fight the cruelty that terrorists, saddaam, etc enact on people of other countries. Truth is, one country shouldnt feel like its their sole responsibility. Thats what the United Nations was created for.
And Im glad to hear that some people see that we need to assess the situation as it is today, and not spend our time looking at the mistakes we made. Saying "we never should have gone to Iraq, lets pull out all our troops immediately" is irrational. But I can see the rationality in the argument that the troops should be gradually withdrawn.
How gradually? What is the level of US casualty you're comfortable with while we gradually withdrawal? What measurable criteria would you use to decide when and how many troops leave?
We have around 150,000 troops there and we can barely keep the place from going completely to hell. Where are we going to find even 50,000 UN troops to go in there? They cannot do anything in Darfur because of the geography of the situation -- they need helicopters and air transport to react because the area is the size of France. Now imagine the UN's similar problem in a nation the size of Iraq. We can barely get enough help from NATO to keep Afghanistan from going to the Taliban again.
This is where it becomes really complicated (and nothing to do with the initial morality or stupidity of going into Iraq in the first place). (1)Do we pull out the U.S. troops over the next year or two and save OUR soldiers' lives but watch as another 100,000 innocent civilians die, who are just trying to live their lives like you and I (fuck the militia fighters, they can kill each other all day for all I care) or (2) do we stay there another ten years and lose another 4000 U.S. soldiers at the risk of saving all of those innocents from the ravages of a full blown civil war.
As much as I hate this idiotic escapade over there I'm leaning towards option two. It becomes more of a numbers game to me by not looking at it on a nationalistic approach but more of a all humans are equal approach. I dont want to watch people in Iraq who are no different than my friends and family die because our government intentionally/unintentionally (depending on your perspective) started this crap. I have a hard time believing peace protesters around the country would feel any differently if they look at it this way, but maybe they would. Just my two cents.
I think you are assuming the country is going to continue on its current path even when US troops withdraw, forgetting that the current situation is a result of US presence. IE, you end US occupation you end the violence.
But most of the violence over there currently is a power struggle between the religious factions. That will not go away after our troops leave. There will be full blown war between the them without our presence (or UN troops, which just aint gonna happen unfortunately). Death squads now just drag random people out of their homes/cars and kill them for being the wrong religion. Without a heavy US presence I cannot fathom how bad it will become. That doesnt even factor in the Kurds.
Its a matter of opinion, while history shows us unrest is good for bussiness.
I've seen all of those videos. But that has nothing to do with this. Most of the current violence - the market bombings, death squads, etc.. -- has nothing to do with our presence. They are in a power struggle to control Iraq's future. This is a religious war now between the shia and sunni. The roadside bombs on our troops are from insurgents and the so-called Al Queda in Iraq. The bloodshed I'm concerned with in this argument is the violence on civilians by the two religious factions. The lack of our presence there will have no calming effect on their violence.
I understand the war profiteering. I really do. I know more about unofficial U.S. policy in third world countries than i really care to because it makes me sick. But if you really think pulling our troops out will stop the violence then I personally believe you are incorrect. These guys hated each other loooooong before we became a nation.
Most people didnt see it that way? One faction was oppressed by the other while Saddam was in power. It is payback time, they want the power (and both want the U.S. out). It, unfortunately, is not as simple as you make it. We really screwed things up and innocent civilians are going to pay the price. When we left Vietnam did the violence stop? Why not?
I have to get to bed so goodnight, Commy.
Have a good night
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoxlzPGIPt4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0BBKjllSlU
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde