The War in Iraq; why is it wrong?

Redyellowblackdog, I agree with you to a point in the fact that we should have forgone the "birthing of a democracy"! I don't believe it will ever gell because Islam and democracy are an oxymoron! I can see where you are coming from with your last statement but I don't know if leaving a country leaderless and in economic shambles was the answer either.

Their not going by the independent studies about the iraq war. They seem to be doing the opposite. Iraq never attacked the u.s. and had no affiliation with al qaeda. We were the ones doing all the attacking on them to begin with. There was no reason to go to war in iraq because of that.

...sometimes I think the psyche of the world is if we'll just let these despots get their genocides over with, we can work out world peace with them - It was public sentiment delayed us from world war 2 and millions perished horribly because of it. I hope we don't repeat the past..

I really like it when people express opinions different from the run of the mill pap usually encountered in the news. I may not necessarily agree with what you say, but this is one interesting response. Good one!

4ftfingers, I'm not sure I follow you on the oil. Are you trying to tell me we are getting free oil from Iraq and charging the American public between 3 and 4 dollars a gallon for gas? I don't believe the information you have is very credible but I sure would like to know where you got this information. Saddam Hussein thumbed his nose at the US because he didn't think we would jump? I believe that assertion is correct to a point also except it wasn't that he didn't think we would jump, he had no choice given he had WMDs he was hiding.

Again, You or no one else can possibly believe that Saddam Hussein was that stupid! He Had WMDs, we gave him too much time to move and hide them. We couldn't allow Saddam to continue this path just like we will not be able to tolerate Iran becomming a nuclear power and when the time comes whether it be McCain or Hillary or Obama the US will not allow a third world country to become nuclear capable!What do you think the huge fuss over Korea was all about?

Obama, Osama you expect me to keep them straight? I can't even keep all my grandchildrens names straight anymore. Lol, if only he would go after Obama right? Sell their SUVs? I'm about to give them my old heap.

There are plenty of resources in this country for the poor. Even the poorest in this country is rich compared to most in third world countries, we don't know the meaning of poverty here. Radical Islam is taking over the world under your nose. http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZjBhMTM5MTlmN2YzNzE0MmFkOTg2OGYxNWM2MGNiNTQ If we pull out of Iraq it will spread faster than Clem can say "vent fan".

Then they need to take whatever steps necessary to change their situations instead of waiting for a government handout. The concept is called personal responsibility, and I think it is high time the country got back to it.

Your answer makes me want to giggle. Looking at your answer, I got an impression that you don’t need United Nations at all. Is it right? If yes, why do you also need other nations to take care of terrorism? From your point of view, it means that every country can invade or destroy other sovereign countries whenever and wherever they would like to do so. If so, we are living like in a jungle . I am wondering whether or not this is a 21st century when people should be more civilized than in the past centuries?? Of course, USA is also a sovereign country and I do have a great respect to USA. It is indeed a great nation because I had been there. I do really understand your stand point. Saddam is NOT a great leader. He invaded Kuwait and he treated his people unkindly. He had been a great threat to surrounding areas including the world peace. I also understand that USA also feels that it is “being invaded” by Bin Laden. So, both Saddam and Bin Laden should also NOT invade other nations in the first place. My point is ... don’t we have a procedure to solve every world problem? United Nations (UN) is one of those procedures. If the United Nations (UN) stinks as you said, why can’t we find other procedures? If we can avoid a war, why should we wiggle a war? If we don’t like to be invaded by other countries, why should we also wiggle a war in the first place? We are not like those who are harsh and barbaric. We are more civilized than them, aren’t we? I would like to let you know that most people including other nations don’t understand your stand point. Again, they can’t often comprehend your point. You would like to do what it is based on your "best" consideration so that a world peace (i.e., a safe world) can be maintained. I also know that you have also used other means (i.e., sanctions and/or embargo, etc) but at the same time, some people are so harsh and barbaric. But I believe that there is still a way out to solve every problem without a war. The war should be a last resort and it must be based on a proper procedure. Otherwise, we will get back to a stone-age. Since this discussion is asking why the Iraq war is wrong, I may have to let you know again why other nations feel "sick" about the Iraq war. Well, if you think the opinions of other nations are worthy to be taken into account . If not, why is this discussion opened?

There is no possible way to solve every problem without war. When diplomacy breaks down, then war is often the only answer. As to the UN, it has an agenda that is not part of it's original intended purpose, and it threatens every nation's sovrenignty. In short, it wants to become the world government, instead of merely a meeting place where countries try to work out differences. It has ceased being useful a long time ago.

We didn't need the stinking UN's approval... The US is a sovereign country as well, or hadn't you noticed? We enforced a ceasefire that had been violated, and we didn't need anyone's permission to do so either. If it had been left up to the lily-livered Un, they would probably still be issuing sanctions against the "late" Saddam. We took care of business.

The war is not the problem with the economy... the housing bauble, the sub prime lending practices, bad investments by the investment banks, high fuel prices, high food prices, excessive government regulation and taxation that is throttling free enterprise and our free market economy, global warming legislation, and excessive socialist program spending are what is damaging our economy. It isn'tt just the US either, the entire world economy is in trouble right now, and it is going to get much worse.

I'm flat saying that this war is NOT the reason the economy is in the shape it is in. There are many more economic factors at work, not the least of which is the spending that Congress is doing. If you think time are bad now, then you really are not going to like what is about to happen if the democrats get their way. Why not do some actual research and find out the reasons the economy is slow instead of blaming the war for all of oyur economic problems? I should be asking you what you are talking about, because you sure don't know.

I agree totally about alSadr. He is and will be a thorn in any viable governments side if he is left to run renegade in his own little world.

Clrumfelt, How true! It's incredible how liberals can puff up their chests and tout the greatness of the fabulous Slick Willie and yet most of the terrorist problems we have today stem from his actions or might I say inactions! It may not be in our lifetime but history will prove, when all of the facts are in, William Jefferson Clinton was an incompetent, self-righteous, lying, power abusing SOB!

Oh, my! Did I forget draft dodger?

A safer place? We stirred up more conflict in the country that already had conflicts.

You are so right with having that attitude about it all. I guess the thing is that bad news just gets more ratings and so a lot of the good gets left out.

"I live in an area where everyone thinks we're doing the right thing." I'm curious as to where that is because I'm hard pressed to find one person around the area where I live. Saddam Hussein was a no-good rotten SOB, you're not going to get an argument from me about that, but there are many others as bad or worse in this world - is it up to us to take them all out and reshape their countries into the way we think they should be run? As for OUR interest in what happens in Iraq, even Petreaus can't say our security is improved one bit because of our actions in Iraq. Annie

Annie, I'm sure there would have been much less violence and bloodshed back in the 1770s also if America had just cowed down to the British and payed all those taxes! With change of the magnitude that has happened in Iraq of course there will be those who will say, "it was better before, at least we weren't being bombed everyday" but at the end of it all, even these people will be grateful for what was changed. Besides, these people KNOW the American soldiers will not kill them for speaking their mind which can't be said for terrorists like Sadr! And yes he is in fact a home grown terrorist seeking nothing more than what all arrogant tyrants want and that is power!

I guess you done went and forgot about the Iraqi violations of the ceasefire that the US had with them as a condition of peace? That's all the reason we needed.