Should We Be In Iraq? what do you think about the war in Iraq

[@mberlust 0]

There are many concerns about the war in Iraq...just wondering what you guys think.

Notice from BuffaloHELP:

Post in the correct section and post with quality contribution.

Edited June 6, 2006 by BuffaloHELP (see edit history)

[heavensounds 0]

Well I think NOT and YES! This is a though question and need to bee seen from different perspectives. First of all there was Hussein and he had to be removed in order to prevent killings that occurred under his government! BUT we shouldnt forget that what leads countries in war is something like money or similar (oil). And this is exactly why bush went there - believe me he didnt want to safe those lives, because he should first take care for his own ameican people...but he went there and he did it for oil..IMO he divides Iraq only according to the number of octans that are in the gas in that particular area So yes something had to be done, but not in that way as it has been by bushy! He is killing innocent people in order to secure his damn oil..

[gameratheart 0]

This topic is in the wrong place. The category it is currently under ("Freebie Stuff") is for discussion of Free Computer Resources. Have reported to mods to move the topic.

[mik 0]

I think the war in Iraq has been handled badly from the start, in a way that is guaranteed to make everyone in the world angry at America. So far Pres. Bush and his republican party friends have shown that they do not care what anyone thinks, they even seem to go out of their way to make matters worse, to make everyone angrier. Don't listen to what the White House says about the war. They will continue to lie through their teeth in an effort to convince the American public to view the news from Iraq through rose tinted glasses. In the coming months I think you will see some changes forced on the administration, whether they like it or not. The army is under tremendous pressure, many troops are on their third or fourth tour of duty in Iraq, there just doesn't seem to be the numbers available to keep the troop strength up in Iraq for much longer. Then there are the elections in November, there is a good chance that the elections will have the result of shaking things up.The whole of congress seems to think that the roof will fall in if America withdraws its troops from Iraq in its present state of civil war, but that assumes that the US presence there has a calming effect.

[tdm 0]

To be honest i just feel that everyone is trying to make the matter worse. The people who matter, The soldiers who have to fight, Dont say wheather they go to war or not. If Pres. Bush got his hands dirty and tried to calm things down over in iraq it would be better.

[Hadi 0]

I think that the Iraqi people suffered so much from Hussein, now that he is removed, the people is begging to the Americans to return to Hussein.Did anyone saw the pictures of the prison of abou ghrayb? I mean come on look what the American soldiers did to poor Iraqi people. WHY Bush is against these picture and against everyone who published pictures like these? It's definitely because he did something wrong and he is afraid of the people to find out. HATE HIM!!!

Edited June 6, 2006 by Hadi (see edit history)

[matto 0]

To answer your question: No. We should not be in Iraq. The only reason that we are there is oil. There are no weapons of mass destruction. The government has lied to us, several times, about this and other things.

[homeloansnow 0]

Let's answer this by asking one simple question: did the Iraqis request our aid? The simple answer to that question is no. We are in Iraq for two reasons. The first and most obvious reason is oil. The second is the 'superman complex' of George W. Bush. Saddam has not been in power for what, two years? Three? What has really changed? As soon as we pull out of Iraq some other madman will take his place, and the Iraqis will be right back where they started. The Iraq war is nothing more than political posturing by a lame duck president who needed something to boost his poll scores. I feel bad for our troops over there who have no choice but to fulfill their orders.When will America stop trying to be the saviour of the world, and start fixing whats wrong in our OWN country? We can spend billions whipping a little democracy ( and our huge war machine) on some other country, while we have people sleeping on the ground just scant feet from the White House. We send millions into these war-torn (by us, in many cases) countries to help them feed themselves and repair all the damage, while we have children starving in our own backyards. I think we need to take care of our own before we try to fix everyone else.

[Joshua 0]

No. Regardless of how Hussein treated people, we weren't supposed to be there because of that. Our nation's leaders blatantly lied to us the people so we'd fight a war for their own private purposes. There was a brief pretense at finding those who gave the disinformation just to get the heat off them but I haven't heard of anyone being found responsible. Our leaders seem to want control of the middle east, perhaps for the oil. Afghanistan was understandable... Iraq was not, especially considering the lying about WOMD to get Americans to go along with it. And now they're trying to get us after Pakistan. I am loyal to my country. But like Mark Twain says in "A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court" that doesn't mean loyalty to the leaders. In Connecticut the constitution, he notes, says that if the leaders are hurting the people every person is responsible to stand up if that's what they feel and give their voice against it, even if they're the only ones doing so. And if the rest don't feel that way, it's their responsibility to vote them down. Twain says it's not about the laws or government or leaders, but the people. Isn't that what America was made to be for? A government for the people, by the people? Isn't it then disloyal to say we should blindly trust our leaders even as they betray the very people they were elected to represent?

[Panzer 0]

The war on Iraq was a

War against terror

To me it looks like a war on iraq. If it were a war on terror, why did the US bomb the Achmed Al-Zaqaui guy, why didnt they just send a covert ops team in or something, instead they had to kill him and 40 civilians...

The way i see it, it has turned into a war against Iraq, not terror

[Webber 0]

I have mixed opinions. I guess I believe that we should have gone in, but now we should leave. I'm really a little confused about the whole affair to be honest. I mean - to be honest do we really know what goes on in Iraq? M16 & the FBI will make sure that we don't know all the motives for it, and we most certainally don't know what the full picture is at the moment, and the press are either biased against it or biased for it, anyway for them to make more money, so I this is just simply how I understand it, and isn't neccessarily how it really is... I believe we were right to go in, because we got rid of an evil dictator, which is obviously a good thing, because no one should live under supression like the Iraq people did for so long, but I think after the liberation of Iraq we should have drawn out, and that way the British, US and other operating forces would have been seen as heroes (which most probably would have cut down on terriost attacks) and we would middle eastern support and influence, a long with public support at home. I think to be honest, a majority of the country is being very unfair. We did, and still are helping to rebuild their country, we did a very risky job and helped them have the first democratic election, and we are still continuing to help them rebuild, supplying them with food, fuel, water and military hardware, and were also helping them defeat suicidal bombers, and they seem to repay us for all of that, plus their liberation by shooting at our lads or rioting. The fact is that our soliders gave their lives for those people, and they seem to be chucking it back in our faces, so I say we should draw out, and leave them to it. If they have no supplies - tough... If they get overthrown by rebels - tough... I dont see why we should loose the public support at home and loose our guys out there for people that dont even thank us for our efforts. Ofcourse I know that there are a number of grateful civilians out there, but no were near enough.

[hh89 0]

I don't know. And going off the subject somewhat, all this junk about Bush doing the wrong thing by sending our troops to Iraq has come to a complete overkill. I think we'd have to go to war sooner or later, especially when idiots like Hussein and Bin Laden are running around. (Except that we already caught Hussein, pfft, the loser...) A lot of citizens of the US open their big fat mouths and are so ready to critisize what our leaders do. But I wonder if your perception would change were you one of our leaders at the time the whole thing with Iraq went down. I think if the deal with Iraq is keeping our borders of the US safe from harm, we should be there. Uh huh, it's a lot easier said than done, but someone's gotta do it. I think it'd be better if we did it to them first before they did it to us.

Edited July 24, 2006 by hh89 (see edit history)

[arnz 0]

Straight answer, no. Like many others, I felt that there was no Weapons of Mass destruction, and that the involved parties were there for another reason, which was oil.I'll agree to an extent that Hussein's treatment of people is really bad, but still I felt that the coalition involved still intruded in. But to be honest, I havent followed it that much though but have seen the clips regularly on news programs.

[spieleforum 0]

i think there was no reason to make war with iraq and the people who decidet to make this war did know that the reasons they told to the rest of the world wasnt true its all about money iraq always wanted a higher price for oil but the the america gounerment didnt want because they dont have enougth money to pay them out so they mad war and this isnt fair i think they are going to make war to iran too i feel sad for all the soldiers (the american and the iraq) who have to lost there lives in the war and there familiesand all the people who were injured in the war and iam angry about all politicans that decidet to to this warits a shame for the american gouverment to attac a land that doesnt have a real infrastructure or a way to defend there selfesi think when the iraq didnt had so much presure they could have lived normal without any religious fanatics like many other arabic states too

[Panzer 0]

I strongly agree with Michael Moores points in Farenheit 911. It turned from a war against the terrorists in Afganistahn into a war against Iraq. Anyone else agree ?