I would like to get your opinion on what went wrong in Iraq, what went right in Irag and what you believe is the solution to Iraq.
I don't want you to use this as a I hate Bush and America is evil platform. Instead handle it like a third party. As someone who looks at everything from the start until now and come up with an intelligent response. Realize that what happened happened. Some of you have been here from the beginning and have followed everthing. If you haven't been here from the beginning I encourage you to go back to the beginning threads of this forum and get caught up.
I'll start by asking a few questions.
1. Why did America go into Iraq in the first place? Was it the right thing to do?
2. Saddam threatened to use WMD against the Coalition. Did Saddam know that he didn't have WMD?
3. Just about all countries in the UNSC thought Iraq had WMD. Why? Who got it right and who got it wrong?
4. Should we have left Saddam in power and why?
5. There have always been Sunni's, Shi ite's, Kurds and Christians in Iraqi how did Saddam keep them from killing each other? Would that work today?
6. Where are they getting their weapons/bombs to kill each other?
7. How do we stop them, or should we stop them?
8. Some say that the initial war ended and we are in a different war. What happen?
9. Who is the Coalition fighting now? Would the fighting stop if we left?
10. If you were in charge of the Coalition what would you do.
11. If you were President of Iraq what would you do?
12. If you were President of the US or PM of Great Britain what would you do?
13. What should Iraq's neighbors do, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iran, Syria?
14. Anything else that you want to interject including any questions you may have?
15. How does this end?
Don't feel like you have to answer everything in one post and you don't have to number your answers.
5. There have always been Sunni's, Shi ite's, Kurds and Christians in Iraqi how did Saddam keep them from killing each other? Would that work today?
He was a bigger threat to any one of those groups than they were to each other. Yes it would work today, but it would require that Iraq return to a kind of police state. That might not be as bad as it seems, because the problem with Sadam's police state was that it was also threatening us. However, once we decided to take him out, part of our justification was to eliminate his police state repression of the Iraqis. So re-installing a police state would seem awfully hypocritical.
Sadam was sitting on the lid of a giant pressure cooker. When we took him out, the lid popped off, and here we are with an exploding mess.
Is it better to allow a dictator to brutalize his people in order to keep them from fighting with each other, or is it better to get rid of the dictator and let his people fight out their differences?
I think the only choice was one or the other, and we chose the latter.
I don't think an actual Police State by it's definition is the answer. And I think that the militias are too organized and have too many weapons for it to be handled by any police.
Personally I do think that there is a Civil War going on there and I don't think that us being there has all that much to do with it. Iraq was on the brink of Civil War for many years prior to us going in. Except now with Saddam and his henchmen out of the way they now feel that the time is right. If you remember during the 80's and 90's expecially the 90's the only thing that prevented the Shi ite's from attacking Saddam was the U.S. or lack of backing by the U.S.
If you remember the Shi'ites rose up against Saddam and were defeated. They were expecting help from the U.S. promised by Bush 41. However (either during Clinton or our Democratic Congresss during Bush 41) prevented the U.S. from helping the Shi'ites and after that they didn't trust the U.S. to keep it's promises.
1. Why did America go into Iraq in the first place? Was it the right thing to do?
a. Oil, Oil and Oil, and to have a foot hold in the region, a clear massage to all governors of the middle east that Big brother is here. Here we see success in achieving the above. Don’t tell me that the oil prices had gone sky high, I know and you should also know who is gaining the profits..
b. Secure Israel and provide all the means to the peace process. So far we had seen clearly the stand of all Arab leaders accept Basher Al Asad of Syria towards the war between Hizbullah and Israel.
2. Saddam threatened to use WMD against the Coalition. Did Saddam know that he didn't have WMD?
a. Yes he knows that he don’t have WMD, he was gambling on that paper (the fear of he might have WMD), although he clearly said in TV interviews that he dose not have WMD.
3. Just about all countries in the UNSC thought Iraq had WMD. Why? Who got it right and who got it wrong?
a. What would be the reason to justify a war in Iraq other than the existence of WMD?
b. Who put this idea on the table?? USA and Britain, why?? See above.
4. Should we have left Saddam in power and why?
a. Although I am so grateful for the removal of Saddam, but he was no threat to the USA, yes he played mouse and cat every now and then but he was not going to do any thing, the army was at its lowest and the masses were so tired of the embargo which was imposed on the ordinary people of Iraq and not on Saddam and his cronies who are fighting for him now.
b. Apparently saddam was in defiance to the American policies, just like Hugo shafeez and such people should not exist (that’s what American rulers think) so leaving him in power will encourage others to stand up and say NO to the American policies, an example must be set up and he was picked up. Thank you America.
5. There have always been Sunni's, Shi ite's, Kurds and Christians in Iraqi how did Saddam keep them from killing each other? Would that work today?
a. For ordinary people there was no problem at all, for example, my grand father is a shiat, my grand mother was a Sunni Kurd 9from my father’s side) my grand father was a shiat and my grandmother was a Sunni Arab, my father-in-law is a shiat and my mother-in-law is a Sunni Kurd, my best friends were Christians and I go to pray in a mosque and in a church. Both for me represent a house of god and god is one.
b. Saddam was by himself a problem that nothing else matters.
c. Shiat and Sunnis are fighting now, reasons?? Someone is igniting and fuelling this fight. Who? Americans of course Why? So that every one says America must stay and protect!! Hah got it??
6. Where are they getting their weapons/bombs to kill each other?
a. In Iraq you can find a weapon easiest than finding a piece of bread. Beside what is the roll of our brothers in Iran, Syria, Jordan and Saudi Arabia? Aren’t they supplying fighters and weapons?
b. The Americans intentionally left the Iraqi army weapon stokes unguarded after the invasion, I pointed this out in one of my earliest discussions here on this forum and some one thought I was joking, I was not.
7. How do we stop them, or should we stop them?
a. Too late, the jinny (Goblin) is out of the bottle.
8. Some say that the initial war ended and we are in a different war. What happen?
a. The Americans went in, without a plan to what is next, they thought priority is to defeat the Iraqi army and topple Saddam, the fact was there were no Iraqi army and Saddam was on the verge of falling by him self.
b. For not planning for stage 2 it resulted into what we have now.
c. If the American were sincere in their acts they would have won the hearts of Iraqis instead getting their hatred, for three years now, where is the infrastructure of Iraq (mind you it was all destroyed in the 1991 war and the 2003 war) by whom?? I leave the answer to you. Power, drinking water, sewer, health, education, communication…..etc all gone and no one thought of the needs of the people.
9. Who is the Coalition fighting now? Would the fighting stop if we left?
a. Every one and the fighting will not stop if the Americans left Iraq.
10. If you were in charge of the Coalition what would you do.
a. The same they are doing right now “clueless”.
11. If you were President of Iraq what would you do?
a. Nothing he have no powers, he have no security forces to support him, he have no allies who would support him without recalculating profit and losses
12. If you were President of the US or PM of Great Britain what would you do?
a. Keep lying to the people until my term is finished then I go and enjoy life with all the money I made out of this war.
13. What should Iraq's neighbours do, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iran, Syria?
a. Leave Iraq for Iraqis to settle their differences.
14. Anything else that you want to interject including any questions you may have?
a. No
asantana said this in post #5 : c. If the American were sincere in their acts they would have won the hearts of Iraqis instead getting their hatred, for three years now
asantana has summed up everything I would have said.
If much of the world did not believe America's intentions were sincere - which was according to Bush and Blair to disarm Iraq of WMD - then the Iraqis would not believe a word of what either leader was saying? This was a disastrous way to begin a military intervention. Any trust from the very beginning was missing.
And for the neocons, the strategic and economic power of being able to have a permanent presence in Iraq, backed up by a strong military presence, right next to Syria and Iran - just in case they stepped too far out of line - was just too tempting an opportunity to miss after 9/11.
And most of the 9/11 terrorists were Saudis. If terrorists could do that to the US, then could America trust the Saudis to protect Saudi oil? Iraq would have cushioned such a blow to US supplies.
Since WMD has become the pivot point in the overall argument, I think it would be helpful if someone could post a list of all the well-credentialed individuals and organizations who stated that Iraq had WMD during the years leading up to the Iraq invasion. Otherwise people might get the impression that Bush was the only one who made the mistake.
[i]
c. Shiat and Sunnis are fighting now, reasons?? Someone is igniting and fuelling this fight. Who? Americans of course Why? So that every one says America must stay and protect!! Hah got it??
[/B]
So if the coalition pulls out, the fighting will end? Certainly, you are for an immediate withdrawl, right?
EUCLID said this in post #7 : Since WMD has become the pivot point in the overall argument, I think it would be helpful if someone could post a list of all the well-credentialed individuals and organizations who stated that Iraq had WMD during the years leading up to the Iraq invasion. Otherwise people might get the impression that Bush was the only one who made the mistake.
The argument is a dead horse. The intel was cherry picked, exaggerated, sexed up. Intel that didn't fit the bill was ignored. There never was a 45 minute capability to launch WMDs. There never was yellow cake from Niger to make nukes. There never were any drones fitting with WMD etc etc.
Why waste anyone's time, just listen to what those who had access to the intelligence said in early 2001. The US Secretary of State, Colin Powell said at a press conference in Cairo on 24 February 2001, when asked about sanctions Iraq was under:
quote:
And frankly they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq...
Colin Powell knew that Iraq did not even possess CONVENTIONAL weapons with which it could threaten its neighbours!
29 July 2001, Condoleezza Rice said while on the CNN Late Edition With Wolf Blitzer:
quote:
But in terms of Saddam Hussein being there, let's remember that his country is divided, in effect. He does not control the northern part of his country. We are able to keep arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt.
Condoleezza Rice knew that his military forces HAD NOT BEEN REBUILT! How clear do you wan it spelt out for you?
You really can't say what people knew at that time. Only what is known now. It's evident that the intel was flawed or wrong from all sources. But it took years after being there enmass before coming to that conclusion.
Maybe so, but a lot of people would have you believe that the whole thing was cooked up by Bush to justify an invasion for the benefit of him and his Neocon buddies. The horse may be dead now, but my point is that Bush was not the only one riding it.
Edward Teach said this in post #10 :
You really can't say what people knew at that time.
I don't need to say what people knew at that time, they can say it very well for themselves. The first quote was from Bush's Secretary of State at the time, Colin Powell, and the second was from Bush's National Security Adviser, Condoleezza Rice.
quote:
Only what is known now.
Nonsense. Powell and Rice couldn't have stated more clearly what they knew in early 2001, and that was that there were no WMD in Iraq and he wasn't even a threat to his neighbours with conventional weapons.
quote:
It's evident that the intel was flawed or wrong from all sources. But it took years after being there enmass before coming to that conclusion.
Why exactly is it evident the intel was flawed? If the intel was cherry-picked, sexed up and exaggerated, while inconvenient intel was ignored then how does that make the intel itself flawed? Surely the people manipulating the intel are at fault?
So if the coalition pulls out, the fighting will end? Certainly, you are for an immediate withdrawl, right?
Wrong, what is done is done and the killing and revenge killing took it’s tole on the people; it had reached the point of no return.
The fighting will continue for a long time, with or without the collation forces around. And trust me no one will know why they are fighting and what they are fighting for.
Immediate withdrawal can create even greater dangers, the Al-Qyda will see victory in that, they will bring up the fight to other places and frankly it will be a defeat to the Americans unless they will come up with a sound plan to withdraw, which I doubt Bush and his administration have any knowledge to do with planning. And that’s the weakest point for the Americans. In my opinion there will be no withdrawal during bush time, it will take place after he leave the office.
In my opinion there will be no withdrawal during bush time, it will take place after he leave the office.
Aside from your opinion about what will happen, what would you like to happen? Do you want the U.S. forces out or not? It sounds like you are saying that their presence is causing the violence, but that their removal would increase the violence.
11-25-2006 03:27 PM
