PDA

View Full Version : Why are we in Iraq now???


Logical
06-21-2006, 06:39 PM
Why and how doe this directly benefit the US to make it worth sacrificing American lives, not to mention ungodly vast sums of money?

I am looking for your personal opinions, not some rehashed BS statement you can find on a blog or from a blowhard from this administration.

We originally intended to depose Saddam that was done back in 2003 so why are we still there?

jspchief
06-21-2006, 06:42 PM
Because we have to help rebuild what we tore down. To leave now would be to leave the job half done. Besides being bad diplomacy, it would result in a worse Iraq than the one we originally tried to fix.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 06:45 PM
Pottery Barn principal.

jAZ
06-21-2006, 06:47 PM
Because BushCo intends to establish permanant bases in Iraq. He's long since said that it will be for the next President to decide when to leave Iraq, he won't be the one to do it.

Phobia
06-21-2006, 06:47 PM
I think we're foolishly trying to stablize Iraq and maintain a presence there much like we've done with Germany, Okinawa, and Guam post-WWII.

Strategically, it makes all the sense in the world. I just can't see us having any success in stabilizing that area without doing something incredibly devistating al la Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

jspchief
06-21-2006, 06:49 PM
So for those that think we're working towards establishing a permanent presence... Do you believe Iraq is stable enough for us to pull out, if we weren't working towards a permanent presence?

Logical
06-21-2006, 06:50 PM
Pottery Barn principal.

I am afraid I am not familiar with your reference, could you elaborate?

recxjake
06-21-2006, 06:53 PM
so iraq doesnt turn into a terrorist breeding ground

Donger
06-21-2006, 06:56 PM
I think we're foolishly trying to stablize Iraq and maintain a presence there much like we've done with Germany, Okinawa, and Guam post-WWII.

Strategically, it makes all the sense in the world. I just can't see us having any success in stabilizing that area without doing something incredibly devistating al la Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Having a military presence in an area that controls a significant portion of the commodity that 'fuels' our economy may not be a bad idea, IMO.

'Hamas' Jenkins
06-21-2006, 06:58 PM
I am afraid I am not familiar with your reference, could you elaborate?

Colin Powell used it in reference to the first Gulf War. The Reason why we didn't topple Saddam was because we would then have to prop up the next government and the country until it was self sustaining. The quote goes a little something like this: "We broke it, now we have to fix it."

Phobia
06-21-2006, 07:07 PM
So for those that think we're working towards establishing a permanent presence... Do you believe Iraq is stable enough for us to pull out, if we weren't working towards a permanent presence?Not a chance. It would fall into the hands of whichever madman executed the most people who defy him on national TV. Those people know nothing other than being under a tyrant's thumb.

This is my ignorant opinion on what to think of Iraq. I'll admit I have not followed the situation closely in past months.

I Have No Imagination
06-21-2006, 07:39 PM
to kill the bad guys

BucEyedPea
06-21-2006, 07:40 PM
Why and how doe this directly benefit the US to make it worth sacrificing American lives, not to mention ungodly vast sums of money?

Imo, it doesn't benefit us at all.
Iraq sold us oil.
Unfriendly nations will sell their oil.



We originally intended to depose Saddam that was done back in 2003 so why are we still there?

I don't think we should have done this either. I do not think he was a threat, even if he had WMD. I believe MADD works and that he was containable. It's not our business to depose thugs on a selective basis.

alanm
06-21-2006, 07:50 PM
I've been saying it since day 1 that their preparing Iraq for a staging area for the coming Iranian war. And don't kid yourself, it's coming.

I Have No Imagination
06-21-2006, 07:53 PM
I've been saying it since day 1 that their preparing Iraq for a staging area for the coming Iranian war. And don't kid yourself, it's coming.[George W.]Today Iraq, tommorow, THE WORLD!! BWAHAHAHAHAH*chokes on pretzel*[George W./]

Logical
06-21-2006, 08:22 PM
so iraq doesnt turn into a terrorist breeding groundThat has to be the dumbest statement ever. It was not one before we invaded, now it is one. We turned it into a terrrorist breeding ground. Please don't play again.

Cochise
06-21-2006, 08:39 PM
Because whatever you think of the past few years, we tore the government down, now we are responsible for not leaving the place in anarchy.

memyselfI
06-21-2006, 08:44 PM
Why are we in Iraq now???

Because we can. Simple as that....

Hydrae
06-21-2006, 09:20 PM
We are there now because we invaded. At this point we need to restabilize the area. As was said above, we broke, we need to fix it.

MarcBulger
06-21-2006, 09:45 PM
We must kill as many terrorist as we can while we are there.

We will be fighting Muslim extremist forever. Why not there instead of here and why not now.

KC Jones
06-21-2006, 10:01 PM
I think we're foolishly trying to stablize Iraq and maintain a presence there much like we've done with Germany, Okinawa, and Guam post-WWII.

Strategically, it makes all the sense in the world. I just can't see us having any success in stabilizing that area without doing something incredibly devistating al la Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

I realize I'm going off topic, but I completely agree. Post WWII ocupations and this are a completely different ball game. Both Japan and Germany had been through long bloody wars and seen most of their men die, and their strong economies and infrastructures crushed. Iraq didn't have many casualties in the 'war' and it didn't last long. The infrastructure they had wasn't all that great either, with the vast majority of the population living in poverty. All the power hungry gung-ho guys are still there in Iraq just waiting for the chance to duke it out and grab their piece of the pie.

SBK
06-21-2006, 10:03 PM
You know, when I was in school all the teachers talked about was how much money Reagan spent on the military, and how it could go to schools. Liberals despised him, but it turned out that Reagan was right, and he brought about an end to the cold war.

It'll be interesting 20 years from now to see if Bush's policy of going into Iraq turned out to be right all along.

Personally, if I were Bush I would take the handcuffs off our troops and let em do their jobs. But, I do appreciate the extreme care that we are giving to human life.

Radar Chief
06-22-2006, 07:03 AM
It’s called the “shining beacon philosophy”.
The hope is to create a democratic roll model for the rest of the region.
The problem is rhetoric, and they’re sadly much better at it than we are.
The people of the region have been brain washed with the “all your problems are because America is evil” rhetoric and they’re not just gonna start believe’n our rhetoric over what they’ve been indoctrinated with for decades, even centuries when you consider that we are the infidels, now.
I don’t know if you guy’s will remember a little story posted here on the Planet just after the fall of Baghdad, but much of the ME was upset. Not necessarily that we’d invaded but because they’d been fooled. They actually believed “Baghdad Bob” when he claimed that “American soldiers are falling on their own swords rather than face the brave Iraqi military” only to have their illusions shattered when pictures of our tanks roll’n throw the middle of Baghdad surfaced on al Jazeera.
So what do we do? Sit back and let the psycho dictators and religious leaders continue to manufacture terrorists that will bring their brand of violence to our shores? Or do we attempt to create an irrefutable example of the prosperity a democracy and a free market economy can bring to them?
IMO sit’n on our collective thumbs and hope’n the situation in the ME gets better is what lead to Sept. 11, ’01.

Ugly Duck
06-22-2006, 07:11 AM
It was not one before we invaded, now it is one. We turned it into a terrrorist breeding ground. And that is the uncomfortable truth.

Radar Chief
06-22-2006, 07:12 AM
That has to be the dumbest statement ever.

Topped only by this one.

It was not one before we invaded, now it is one. We turned it into a terrrorist breeding ground. Please don't play again.

To make this claim is to completely ignore all the evidence presented, al Zarqawi, Ansar al Islam, Salman Pak, open monetary support of Hamas, offer of asylum to Bin Hide’n, opening borders to al Quada fleeing Afghanistan, and what’s worse is that we’ve been through this conversation before.
I’m sorry the evidence doesn’t fit your rhetoric, Jim, but to ignore the evidence, that continues to grow BTW, is to betray the “logical engineer” I’ve come to know and respect.

Radar Chief
06-22-2006, 07:13 AM
And that is the uncomfortable truth.

Though you I actually expect that from. :thumb:

the Talking Can
06-22-2006, 07:18 AM
to kill the bad guys

it would have been easier to just invade congress...

the Talking Can
06-22-2006, 07:27 AM
We are there now because we invaded.


bingo

there ain't some grand unified theory, or even a coherent explanation for why we're doing what we're doing...basically, we'll leave our troops there to die until Bush is gone, then the next president will remove them, then Bush and most Republicans (recxjake/marc bulger) will blame Democrats for all the troops that died...

and for all the other dictators our government currently supports? we'll keep supporting them as we always have in spite of Bush's phony rhetoric...and will continue to do nothing about Saudia Arabia who directly finances the madrassas that teach militant-islam..Bush has, and will continue to coddle Saudia Arabia....and we'll all pretend that Iraq was the source of wahabbi-ist movements, even though we also know that they weren't, Saudia Arabia was/is...

basically, we'll just keep believing the same lies...as a citizenship, we're mostly cowards..

BucEyedPea
06-22-2006, 07:47 AM
The hope is to create a democratic roll model for the rest of the region.


Umm...okay! :p
http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/4217/roll3gv.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Radar Chief
06-22-2006, 07:48 AM
it would have been easier to just invade congress...

:LOL: Now that’s funny. :clap:

Radar Chief
06-22-2006, 07:54 AM
Umm...okay! :p
http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/4217/roll3gv.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Ey, I was on a role. Sue me. ;)

morphius
06-22-2006, 08:02 AM
That has to be the dumbest statement ever. It was not one before we invaded, now it is one. We turned it into a terrrorist breeding ground. Please don't play again.
Well, the learder of the country was paying money to terrorist orginizations and giving money to the families of anyone willing to blow them self up to kill a few Jews. Maybe not exactly breeding ground, but not clean either.

The reason we are there now is much like Phobia described. Afghanistan was left to its own, and what we ended up with there is two evil orginizations running the place. If we were to just walk out of Iraq, the insurgents would have still came only instead of killing a few people here or there they would be running the show.

Seems pretty simple.

BucEyedPea
06-22-2006, 08:09 AM
Well, the learder of the country was paying money to terrorist orginizations and giving money to the families of anyone willing to blow them self up to kill a few Jews. Maybe not exactly breeding ground, but not clean either.
Those terrorists did their dirty work in Palestine 99.9% of the time...not here in America. That's not exactly our terrorists or are we really defending Israel?

jspchief
06-22-2006, 08:28 AM
Those terrorists did their dirty work in Palestine 99.9% of the time...not here in America. That's not exactly our terrorists or are we really defending Israel?Yea, it's probably best to wait until they get large enough that they can start blowing up more Americans.

Proaction is over-rated.

mlyonsd
06-22-2006, 08:31 AM
Why and how doe this directly benefit the US to make it worth sacrificing American lives, not to mention ungodly vast sums of money?

I am looking for your personal opinions, not some rehashed BS statement you can find on a blog or from a blowhard from this administration.

We originally intended to depose Saddam that was done back in 2003 so why are we still there?

I see multiple answers to your questions.

The main reason our combat troops are still there is because a miscalculation was made on the insurgency and how long it would take to win the peace.

The reason we don't give up on the effort is because it's the right thing to do. More people in Iraq want a democratic government then don't. It might take decades, but the whole region in the long run could benefit from what democracy brings. (Jobs, lower poverty, etc.) The human rights aspect of it compells us to stay.

Completing the mission is in our and the world's best interest.

morphius
06-22-2006, 08:55 AM
Those terrorists did their dirty work in Palestine 99.9% of the time...not here in America. That's not exactly our terrorists or are we really defending Israel?
Well, we know for a fact we supported Hamas, are you postive that is the only orginization he supported?

I was really just making the point that Saddam did supports at least some terrorism.

jiveturkey
06-22-2006, 10:07 AM
So do we have to wait for all of the violence to end before we can leave? Is this even possible? What exactly is a stable government?

Is it possible that our presenence will only keep the cycle going? What if leaving was the best thing for Iraq?

mlyonsd mentioned "decades" and that's a lot of money and man power. Some of the above questions will need to be answered before and I can stand the thought of decades.

jspchief
06-22-2006, 10:13 AM
So do we have to wait for all of the violence to end before we can leave? Is this even possible? What exactly is a stable government?

Is it possible that our presenence will only keep the cycle going? What if leaving was the best thing for Iraq?

mlyonsd mentioned "decades" and that's a lot of money and man power. Some of the above questions will need to be answered before and I can stand the thought of decades.All good questions. I think the biggest problem we face right now is that no one knows the answers.

Is violence even on the decline? I suppose there may be a point where we may just have to cut and run, but I don't think we've reached the point of giving up just yet. I don't know what would mark that point, or conversely what would determine success.

stevieray
06-22-2006, 10:16 AM
Is it possible that our presenence will only keep the cycle going?

The cycle has been going since Isaac and Ismael.

The right thing and the hardest thing are usually the same thing.

I think that after being terorrized for decades, it's only natural for it to take time for the citizens of Iraq to recover. They are getting there, though.

BIG_DADDY
06-22-2006, 10:42 AM
Why and how doe this directly benefit the US to make it worth sacrificing American lives, not to mention ungodly vast sums of money?

I am looking for your personal opinions, not some rehashed BS statement you can find on a blog or from a blowhard from this administration.

We originally intended to depose Saddam that was done back in 2003 so why are we still there?


You already know the answer so why do you ask?

BucEyedPea
06-22-2006, 10:45 AM
Well, we know for a fact we supported Hamas, are you postive that is the only orginization he supported?

I was really just making the point that Saddam did supports at least some terrorism.


My standard would be collaborative involvement in 9/11...that's it.

I've never read anywhere that he supported Hamas...but if he did so what?
What did Hamas have to do with 9/11? Nothing.

BucEyedPea
06-22-2006, 10:48 AM
Yea, it's probably best to wait until they get large enough that they can start blowing up more Americans.

Proaction is over-rated.
Who's they?
There are over 800 terrorists groups in the world.
The ones who do their dirty work in Israel, only want that land...I do not see that they are expansionist and ready to come here or even go outside the ME.
They are not pan-Islamicists like alQaeda. When there is evidence for that, then I'll reconsider

Logical
06-22-2006, 11:19 AM
Topped only by this one.



To make this claim is to completely ignore all the evidence presented, al Zarqawi, Ansar al Islam, Salman Pak, open monetary support of Hamas, offer of asylum to Bin Hide’n, opening borders to al Quada fleeing Afghanistan, and what’s worse is that we’ve been through this conversation before.
I’m sorry the evidence doesn’t fit your rhetoric, Jim, but to ignore the evidence, that continues to grow BTW, is to betray the “logical engineer” I’ve come to know and respect.

Actually the evidence pre invasion does not fit your model. Financial Support of Palestinians in terror against Israel yes, the rest no evidence prior to invasion.

jspchief
06-22-2006, 11:21 AM
Actually the evidence pre invasion does not fit your model. Financial Support of Palestinians in terror against Israel yes, the rest no evidence prior to invasion.Was there legit evidence produced once we invaded?

MOhillbilly
06-22-2006, 11:38 AM
because we would lose face.

We are America for god sakes.

memyselfI
06-22-2006, 11:53 AM
because we would lose face.

We are America for god sakes.

There it is in a nutshell...

http://events.clowningaround.com/images/Lookalike%20Photos/john%20wayne%20duke.jpg

stevieray
06-22-2006, 12:00 PM
There it is in a nutshell...

http://events.clowningaround.com/images/Lookalike%20Photos/john%20wayne%20duke.jpg


I agree, this post defines your motivation in a nutshell

MOhillbilly
06-22-2006, 12:01 PM
yes we know youre a bleeding heart and a champion for all the leftist underdogs of the world.

Radar Chief
06-22-2006, 12:02 PM
Actually the evidence pre invasion does not fit your model. Financial Support of Palestinians in terror against Israel yes, the rest no evidence prior to invasion.


Yes there was.

October 7, 2002
President Bush Outlines Iraqi Threat
Remarks by the President on Iraq
Cincinnati Museum Center - Cincinnati Union Terminal
Cincinnati, Ohio

snip....
And that is the source of our urgent concern about Saddam Hussein's links to international terrorist groups. Over the years, Iraq has provided safe haven to terrorists such as Abu Nidal, whose terror organization carried out more than 90 terrorist attacks in 20 countries that killed or injured nearly 900 people, including 12 Americans. Iraq has also provided safe haven to Abu Abbas, who was responsible for seizing the Achille Lauro and killing an American passenger. And we know that Iraq is continuing to finance terror and gives assistance to groups that use terrorism to undermine Middle East peace.
We know that Iraq and the al Qaeda terrorist network share a common enemy -- the United States of America. We know that Iraq and al Qaeda have had high-level contacts that go back a decade. Some al Qaeda leaders who fled Afghanistan went to Iraq. These include one very senior al Qaeda leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year, and who has been associated with planning for chemical and biological attacks. We've learned that Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases. And we know that after September the 11th, Saddam Hussein's regime gleefully celebrated the terrorist attacks on America.
Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists. Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints.
.........

Hint: he’s talk’n ‘bout Zarqawi.
If you really need me to I’m pretty sure I can look up Powell’s presentation to the UN that names Zarqawi specifically. Though, if I thought it’d make a bit of difference I’d probably be more motivated to go look’n now. ;) (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021007-8.html)

Logical
06-22-2006, 12:04 PM
I see multiple answers to your questions.

The main reason our combat troops are still there is because a miscalculation was made on the insurgency and how long it would take to win the peace.

The reason we don't give up on the effort is because it's the right thing to do. More people in Iraq want a democratic government then don't. It might take decades, but the whole region in the long run could benefit from what democracy brings. (Jobs, lower poverty, etc.) The human rights aspect of it compells us to stay.

Completing the mission is in our and the world's best interest.I really don't agree with you, there are dozens of democracies that are third world and not improving, Mexico to our south is a classic example, then you can add the strife torn nations of Central and South America. This idea that Democracy is a cure all is a fantasy.

BucEyedPea
06-22-2006, 12:05 PM
I really don't agree with you, there are dozens of democracies that are third world and not improving, Mexico to our south is a classic example, then you can add the strife torn nations of Central and South America. This idea that Democracy is a cure all is a fantasy.
:thumb: I absolutely agree!

Logical
06-22-2006, 12:06 PM
Yes there was.



Hint: he’s talk’n ‘bout Zarqawi.
If you really need me to I’m pretty sure I can look up Powell’s presentation to the UN that names Zarqawi specifically. Though, if I thought it’d make a bit of difference I’d probably be more motivated to go look’n now. ;) (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021007-8.html)You mean the address that Colin Powell has admitted he was coerced into making before the UN and would not do again if given the choice because the data was flawed and he did not personally believe it?

Radar Chief
06-22-2006, 12:06 PM
Was there legit evidence produced once we invaded?

Old evidence, new evidence….:shrug:
It’s just a deflection.

Radar Chief
06-22-2006, 12:08 PM
You mean the address that Colin Powell has admitted he was coerced into making before the UN and would not do again if given the choice because the data was flawed and he did not personally believe it?

That’s an excuse, Jim.
Does that make everything presented vicariously false?
Besides, you claimed evidence wasn’t presented pre-invasion.
I just pointed out that it was.

mlyonsd
06-22-2006, 12:25 PM
I really don't agree with you, there are dozens of democracies that are third world and not improving, Mexico to our south is a classic example, then you can add the strife torn nations of Central and South America. This idea that Democracy is a cure all is a fantasy.

Well, I'm pretty sure that's why I put the word "could" into my statement.

Seeing what the options are I'd say it's the best chance for the majority of people in Iraq.

One thing I left out earlier was oil. Of course that plays a part.

Hog Farmer
06-22-2006, 01:03 PM
This is why we are in Iraq. Logical, You must watch this short video and LISTEN TO THE WORDS!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHvbeqGsktU&search=sept%2011

BIG_DADDY
06-22-2006, 01:16 PM
This is why we are in Iraq. Logical, You must watch this short video and LISTEN TO THE WORDS!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHvbeqGsktU&search=sept%2011

"Die MF Die"

I don't need your forgiveness
I don't need your hate
I don't need your acceptance
So what should I do
I don't need your resistance
I don't need your prayers
I don't need your religion
I don't need a thing from you

I don't do what I've been told
Your so lame why don't you

Just go
Die mother ****er die mother ****er die

I don't need your prison
I don't need your pain
I don't need your decision
So what should I do
I don't need your approval
I don't need your hope
I don't need your lectures
I don't need a thing from you

I'll be sorry when I'm old
You're so full of shit man

Just go
Die mother ****er die mother ****er die

Boom

I don't need your forgiveness
I don't need your hate
I don't need your acceptance
So what should I do

I'll be sorry so you've said
I'm not sorry
Bang You're Dead

Die mother ****er die mother ****er die

Die