We leave Iraq and then what?
By gewcew23
@gewcew23 (8007)
United States
July 13, 2007 11:07am CST
I have been hearing Democrates, Liberals, and some weak kneed Republicans that we need to pullout of Iraq. My question is what after that. Do we just go back to our bunker mentality, cover our eyes, and hope for the best. We cannot contain evil. We tried it Hitler's Germany. When Hitler wanted the iron ore deposits across the Rhine in France he said that it would just be used for peace. Instead it was used to build the powerful Panzer tank that brought fear into the hearts of Europe. He said that all he wanted to do was unify the German race, and then he would stop. Did he, NO! France and Britian could have stop him before he got going. More on to the Evil Empire, the Soviot Union. World domination was on it's mind, but we did not want to angry them so we tried to contain them. Did it work, NO! Koeran War, Vietnam War, Afghanastain invasion, does this sound like containment to you. It does not sound that way to me. What now do we try to contain the Muslim terrorist(and yes I did say muslim they are), do we just sink behind our ten foot thick bunkers and pertend we are safe. They were at war with us before we invaded Iraq. They already tried to blow up the twin towers back in 93. They attacked our embassies in Africa. They attacked the destroyer Cole in international waters. Then they attacked the twin towers on 9/11 with our on planes. We had yet to invade Iraq so that could not have been the reason. So my question is this we leave Iraq then what.
3 people like this
8 responses
@sigma77 (5383)
• United States
13 Jul 07
I think over time, Iraq will return to dictatorship. That is if we leave. I believe the main interest of this country in Iraq is to somehow secure oil imports. I know that we are also concerned with what happens to Iraq and its citizens. But I do not think we can fix the Middle East's problems. It is a complicated situation, similar to the US tax code. It is a situation created by man and thus needs to be worked out by those involved. The countries over there have been fighting each other for centuries. What is up with that?
As long as the US wastes oil and energy as much as it does, we will need the supplies that the Middle East provides. I don't see any changes in American energy usage and wasteful habits that would allow us to tell the Middle East to take a flying leap.
I think ideally we need to remove any reasons for having to interfere with the Middle East. But Americans will not give up their life styles. So until we find alternative energy resources, our presence will be required in some form in the Middle East. That is how I see it.
The thing is that when they attack us, we have difficulty answering the challenge because the enemy is not a country. It is a group of people spread out all over the world. And I think it will take a worldwide inititive to eliminate terrorists or Muslims or whatever they wish to be called. Barbarians should wish to be so choosy.
3 people like this
@worldwise1 (14885)
• United States
14 Jul 07
I agree with you, sigma. I think it is all about oil. We have no legitimate reason for being in Iraq in the first place. Our country has plenty of problems of it's own that should be addressed. Everyone should see the documentary from PBS about the history of the Middle East. I think it was in 4 parts. Other nations have always coveted the oil over there. That is the main reason for wars.
2 people like this
@speakeasy (4171)
• United States
14 Jul 07
"It is all about oil" - yes and no.
The reason we are in Iraq and not Saudi Arabia (where the MAJORITY of the terrorists AND their funding are from) is we do NOT want to risk the Saudi oil fields.
Bush had to do something after 9/11 and Saddam was an easy target; even if he was NOT responsible for THAT attack.
1 person likes this
@worldwise1 (14885)
• United States
14 Jul 07
We are not at war with Iraq, or are we? How many more of our young fighting men and women have to be slaughtered in that foreign land? Those people have been at war with someone for the last several hundred years. Our government sees fit to keep bringing more and more of them into our country. Well, with all of our troops deployed all over trhe world, who will be here to protect us on our own soil when the shoe drops? Them fighting over there will do us very little good. They don't care about just killing Americans, they want to kill everyone.
2 people like this
@worldwise1 (14885)
• United States
14 Jul 07
Only 4,000! My, my my. Well, what price exactly do you place on a human life, gewcew? I'm pretty sure that the families of these 4,000 would pay any price to have their loved ones back home with them. I stand by my opinion that we have no business over there. Normandy was an entirely different scenario. Maybe you should check into how this war is being funded. We are in hock up to our ears and printing money that has absolutely no value.
@worldwise1 (14885)
• United States
14 Jul 07
To you, speakeasy, I don't know about you and yours, but for myself and mine, we are not sitting here killing anybody. I was raised better, and I raised them better. The killing and mayhem that is taking place in our country didn't start with the war. I have my priorities very straight. I am so glad that I was taught to value all human life. You say,what's so bad about losing the paltry number of soldiers that have been killed. I say that every life has some meaning to somebody.
1 person likes this
@chertsy (3798)
• United States
14 Jul 07
Sad to say, but if a democrate is elected for president our troops will be pulled out. Then we will be basically living like we did with any democrate in office. Our military forces will be cut short of funding, bases will shut down. We honestly need to things better, so that we can keep Iraq free from terrorists and at the same time, things better in America. Americans are more aware of our surroundings but not good enough. Our neighbor next door could be holding a dark secret. Its been proven many times that Americans can be attacked, not just in our home country either. As my avitar shows, we shouldn't forget what can happen to us in International waters, 18 sailors lost there lives that day.
@elshaddai123 (3981)
• Kottayam, India
14 Jul 07
Now the next step is Iran,what else they could do.
1 person likes this
@bravenewworld (746)
• United States
13 Jul 07
I actually admire Bush for his stance on Iraq. At least he is sticking with what he believes is right, and not changing with the political climate. Of course, he doesn't have an election to win. But he is sticking by his principles. I didn't agree with entering the war. It seems to have created more terrorists than it's removed. Still, given the current situation, staying the course may be the best policy, to avoid civil war and regional conflict. However, at some point the Iraq government has to stand up for itself, and there is an argument, I think, that this will only happen with at least a partial withdrawal of US troops. I don't know, and I don't think anyone knows for sure. That's why I believe some people are sincere in advocating a pull out from Iraq.
I think communism was defeated economically in the end. I believe terrorism is a result of the spread of capitalism and western ideology. Terrorists cannot stop that peacefully, so resort to terrorism. If we stoop to their level, we're playing into their hands, helping them recruit new terrorists, and making this a religious war. I believe most Muslims will choose freedom, peace, prosperity and reject extremism, if we don't make enemies of them. Maybe I'm just naive.
2 people like this
@gewcew23 (8007)
• United States
13 Jul 07
Well braveneworld you are starting to make some since. I am not advocating starting up a religious war, but we do have to stop them somewhere. If not for us at less for the Middle East. I do agree that most muslim if given the chance would choose a life stlye like Turkey. As long as AlQaeda, and other exist this cannot happen.
1 person likes this
@yemberzal (301)
• India
15 Jul 07
As you sow ,so shall reap. It is fundamental. Before thinking that Americans face terrorism, you must see faults in your system as well. Why Americans think they are privileged to save the universe. See who dropped actuals bombs on civilians in Japan, Who is manufacturing weaponry to destruct the world, it is non but U S.There are billions of people living world wide. Why they are not afraid of so called muslim terrorists. China is a living example, you see no big cases of terror, see Europe, baring Britain,no one is affected . Then why united state is deeply involved. Now who promoted jehadi element , it is U S .In AFGHANISTAN in order to defeat Russia, Taliban were created and then these elements turned against their mentor and why to blame muslims. Infact united state created Osama and used him in Afghanistan.Now see Iraq. Saddam was puppet of U S.He was used to curb Iran. So see in right perspective and before blaming any one, first see fault in yourself. This is great and nice approach to promote peace.Protest any kind of killings , state killings and militant killings , both are to be criticized and stopped.
1 person likes this
@bravenewworld (746)
• United States
15 Jul 07
Well, the terrorists are not jealous of China. They hate the US precisely because it is the strongest, most affluent nation in the world. And if the US has made deals with the devil in the past, it has been in the name of freedom. The US defeated the Nazis and communism, and what is good for America is, ipso facto, good for the world. The US needs weaponry to protect its super power position, so that it can keep the world safe and free. ~ Devil's Advocate
@parthihcl (35)
• India
16 Jul 07
u talk of hitler and cold war time thats not the way u treat iraq war....before u ask the question we leave then what ..........
i will ask the question "u stay so what??"
did anything change......
if u dont have a answer accept the truth and take the issue to uno pls for god sake accept ur defeat dont think of the cold war mindset that ur superpower
@vicouspoultry (21)
• United States
15 Jul 07
Once we leave we allow the Iraqis the establish their own form of government, like the way the United States did when the British left. And before you start saying "But after the British left it was peaceful" To answer that no it wasn't please look up Shay's Rebellion.
