[LunkHead]

Korea is stable for the most part yes? We still have influence on North korea, even if they don't think so... If we were not still in Korea, it would be a far less stable situation there....

I can care less if we pull US troops out of Iraq... But to leave them to them self is pure suicide and an invite to return at a later date with 2 times the mess...

Kris

[test54]

We recently have had an influence in North Korea but their people are not in a good situation. its a poor country with a population that is starving in many ways. I agree that we have kept the peace by dividing the country. That is not an option in Iraq as the groups are mixed throughout the country.

[Giselle9938]

I have no idea about what is going to happen to Irak. But I only know that I can't stand the sadness that I see on the eyes of one of my best friends who already lost his left leg and part of his left arm on this war... Thats why i think this war need to stop as soon as possible

There is a lot of countries in the world that had been fighting for years... Thats why the question here is "Why Iraq?"

Why not Colombia, Africa, Israel or Peru? All of them need help too

If the real reason for this war is helping this people to have a better life, other contries are suffering and dying too... and no one cares about them thats why I chose the option "Who Cares?"

Sorry if some of you don't like it but thats my opinion

[JSanders]

Originally Posted by Giselle9938

If the real reason for this war is helping this people to have a better life,

It is not about helping people have a better life. Not at all.

It is about eradicating world terrorism and protecting US interests as a result of the 9/11/01 terrorist attack on the US.

[Dawg]

I have a cousin who lost his leg in his third tour. He has a titanium leg now and is going back as a private contractor because he believes that much in what we are doing there.

As do many of the soldiers the most of the ones fussing are the ones who didn't think they would ever have to go to war.

But on the other token, I hear a lot of soldiers say they are going to leave the service because of the commander and chief as happened with slick Willie.

[LunkHead]

Originally Posted by JSanders

It is not about helping people have a better life. Not at all.

It is about eradicating world terrorism and protecting US interests as a result of the 9/11/01 terrorist attack on the US.

I could not agree more with this statement...

Kris

[test54]

Originally Posted by JSanders

It is not about helping people have a better life. Not at all.

It is about eradicating world terrorism and protecting US interests as a result of the 9/11/01 terrorist attack on the US.

Well it was about WWMD, then about Saddam, then about Al Queda. So I guess the third best reason works. I do think that our troops do indeed fight terrorists in Iraq. Those terrorists were drawn to Iraq after the war in my opinion. So I guess for now the ends justify the means but do not solve the terrorist issue at all.

just my opinion.

"significant disappointment" - Bush on not finding any WMD.

[LunkHead]

Originally Posted by Giselle9938

Sorry if some of you don't like it but thats my opinion

My opinion was posted here.... Feel free to comment


http://www.blackberryforums.com/sens...ml#post1257385

Kris

[LunkHead]

Originally Posted by test54

Well it was about WWMD, then about Saddam, then about Al Queda. So I guess the third best reason works. I do think that our troops do indeed fight terrorists in Iraq. Those terrorists were drawn to Iraq after the war in my opinion. So I guess for now the ends justify the means but do not solve the terrorist issue at all.

just my opinion.

Ahh.... BUT, we were there once after Iraq invaded the teddy bear of the middle east... Kuwait..... Iraq gassed innocent civilians... Iraq, Iraq, Iraq... Shall I go on with the civil rights violations, the mass murders of innocent civilians because of their beliefs???? I can if you like?

[test54]

Shall we invade every cruel dictator? better get that draft enacted again. The actions of Saddam were known 20+ years ago when we were sending them weapons and $$, if that was the reason to invade then Bush Sr. should have done it back then or W should have had his story straight this time at least.
As those crimes as indeed horrible, they are not terrorism against the US, so if we use that as the justification then we should invade most of Africa and about 20% of the world.

and I never heard of any of those atrocities happening after the first Gulf War.

[LunkHead]

Here is food for thought.... Iraq steam rolled Kuwait... Could have easily steam rolled Saudi Arabia.... Sound familiar? WWII and Hitler ring a bell????

I blame Bush Sr.... We should have completed the job the 1st time...

Was it faulty CIA info, pure BS, or whatever the reason for the 2nd invasion of Iraq? Who knows.... The dude needed to go or he might have launched an attack on mine or your family in the future once he got the *stuff* needed...

The US can't react to an attack AFTER it happens.. Me MUST try and prevent it BEFORE it happens... I have NO doubt that Saddam would have attacked if and when he had the ability....

My .02

Kris

[greggov]

Originally Posted by test54

Well it was about WWMD, then about Saddam, then about Al Queda. So I guess the third best reason works. I do think that our troops do indeed fight terrorists in Iraq. Those terrorists were drawn to Iraq after the war in my opinion. So I guess for now the ends justify the means but do not solve the terrorist issue at all.

just my opinion.

"significant disappointment" - Bush on not finding any WMD.

I think they did have WMDs. Why? Because WE GAVE them to Iraq when we backed them in the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980's. They were used against Iran. So I believe they were there.

So where are they now? Well, my guess is as good as yours. They could be anywhere. A lot of Iraq is desert - they could be buried. Just like these Why don't you see that on the news? Beats me. Probably because it could be used as justification for staying there.

We gave Saddam I don't know how many warnings and empty threats over those weapons. And we had to follow through or we wouldn't be taken seriously. Now, if you have something you're not supposed to have, and someone tells you that they are coming to look for said items, do you keep them or try to dispose of (and by dispose of, I mean move to an undisclosed location, not destroy) or try to show them off? Right. Hide them.

[I liken this to college when you're not of the age to drink, you're not supposed to have alcohol in your room, or drugs/paraphernalia. When the RA's or hall directors announce room check over winter break, you hide all of it, or bring it home with you. You do not leave it on your desk to be found.] Same thing here. We announced we were coming to look for it, and they moved them.

Back to the poll - I think if we don't stay, we'll be back. Only the next time, it could be worse, just like this time is worse than the Gulf War in the 90's.

[test54]

Originally Posted by greggov

I think they did have WMDs. Why? Because WE GAVE them to Iraq when we backed them in the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980's. They were used against Iran. So I believe they were there.

So where are they now? Well, my guess is as good as yours. They could be anywhere. A lot of Iraq is desert - they could be buried. Just like these Why don't you see that on the news? Beats me. Probably because it could be used as justification for staying there.

We gave Saddam I don't know how many warnings and empty threats over those weapons. And we had to follow through or we wouldn't be taken seriously. Now, if you have something you're not supposed to have, and someone tells you that they are coming to look for said items, do you keep them or try to dispose of (and by dispose of, I mean move to an undisclosed location, not destroy) or try to show them off? Right. Hide them.

[I liken this to college when you're not of the age to drink, you're not supposed to have alcohol in your room, or drugs/paraphernalia. When the RA's or hall directors announce room check over winter break, you hide all of it, or bring it home with you. You do not leave it on your desk to be found.] Same thing here. We announced we were coming to look for it, and they moved them.

Back to the poll - I think if we don't stay, we'll be back. Only the next time, it could be worse, just like this time is worse than the Gulf War in the 90's.

I do not dispute the fact that there was at one time WMD in Iraq because yes we did supply them to Saddam. The Iraqis also were making WMD in those days as well, but post '91 war the country was vastly different. They did not have the $$ to keep those programs going and whatever we had supplied them had been used in their wars with Iran and then the battles with the Kurds. That is how I view the lack of and WMDs or remnants of them. Its hard to hide a whole program of labs & scientists ect..

Although we may never know the truth to that.

As for the "taken seriously", no war should be fought because we are afraid we would not be taken seriously.

[greggov]

Originally Posted by test54

Its hard to hide a whole program of labs & scientists ect..

Although we may never know the truth to that.

As for the "taken seriously", no war should be fought because we are afraid we would not be taken seriously.

It is hard, but they had plenty of time to clean up. You're right though, we may never know the truth. Only time will tell.

I agree that we shouldn't fight a war "just" to be taken seriously, but there were ample warnings, threats, request for inspections, etc. They had sufficient time to fully comply with us and the UN, and they were aware of the consequences. IMO, I think the war was a last resort. There was a period of collecting intel, and in the beginning, we had other countries supporting us. Much of that has changed, of course, seeing the current situation there.
------------------
I'm not a huge fan of this war, but we're there now, and I believe we have to follow through. Leaving before Iraq stabilizes could be disastrous, and we'd have to go back to mop up our mess. A lot did go wrong with this war, but pointing fingers isn't going to solve any problems. We, regardless of political affiliation, need to get together and figure out the future based on what we learned from our mistakes.

And this arbitrary deadline to withdraw does not make sense to me. I think we need to listen to our brave men and women on the ground/air/sea over there. They see what's going on firsthand. No daily intel briefing (for the President) on the war can convey what the situation is actually like there. I don't think our troops want to be there any longer than they have to be. But most of them want to finish what they set out do, and we need to let them do that.

[test54]

I think the deadline is not a firm date but a goal. Obama has always said its up to the Generals to say if 16 months is acceptable for a safe withdrawal and the Iraqi government also has a say in it and they have said that 16 months with conditions is acceptable for them. The perception that this is just Obama saying 16 months with no anyone else's input is not true.