US Military Killed In Iraq War

The one assumption here, is that this will not happen because of our assistance.

What if we keep our soldiers there and a new dictatorship is still established? If that's what the people of the country want, let it be. We can only lead them so far before they have to lead themselves.

lol....Half of the people there just about don't want us there. The U.S. thinks they are soppouse to fix everyone's problems instead of worring about their own.

That isolationist attitude is exactly what screwed us up in WWI and WWII. We can't ignore the world's problems. If a country is a haven for terrorists who want to attack us, it is our problem. Anyway, it's true that we (and the Cold War) are to blame for some bad things that happened in the past, perhaps it's time to try and repair some of the damage it's caused instead of letting the end result brew and attack us periodically.

Isolationist attitude? We funded and supplied Saddam during our conflict with Iran. I think an isolationist attitude in this case would probably have caused none of this to occur in the first place.

Now we're just playing clean up.. poorly..

No, I mean the isolationist attitude before WWII... I think maybe you misread my post. (?)

Maybe you should stop posting before you get flammed by us Liberals.

Does it though?

Even if they disagree with why, in one case they were sent to take out Saddam and instutute a new democracy and failed and the other is a success. Obviously I can't imagine the pain they must feel but I have to believe it would just hurt even more if the whole reason they went there failed (even if they don't agree) because then we are back at square 0 but with their family member dead.

JV

Its all probability, the probability of this happening with us there helping out is lower than if we leave.

JV

Interesting, you do realize the BBC (very left leaning) reported on a poll that said otherwise, i'll have to dig it up.

JV

Thanks buddy, this was a really good discussion, everyone was being civil, but now you threaten us?

If this thread turns ugly I hope everyone knows who started it.

JV

Well, unless you weren't relating the isolationist attitude towards current affairs, in which case your post would be rather pointless, I assume you're saying we should avoid an isolationist attitude towards this. What i'm saying is that in avoiding an isolationist attitude, we at least partially caused this.

It's a double sided blade.

Now I tell you what many of my friends in China and Europe say about America "liberating" Iraq: It is a big bad unilateral bully who lied to the world, ignored United Nations, lied to its own people only for the purpose to expand military presence and own business interests in the oil rich region of the world - and to give its own military and military industry a reason to exist. People all over the world are afraid now they might be the next target of an American invasions if it appears profitable to whoever happens to be in power in Washington.

Now you can say Iraq was not democratic or that its leader was bad. Then why did nobody care about that for more than 30 years? And why is the US still allied or doing big business with dictatorships and terror regimes all over the world, from Saudia Arabia to Pakistan to all those nasty African regimes? And since when is it another country's business to appoint a sovereign country's government?

Has Canada the right to invade Washington and install Al Gore as president because he received more votes than Bush during the last election? It may sound mad, but it is not too far fetched. Canadians might have another idea of democracy than the USA, just as USA may have another idea of choosing a government than people in Iraq.

The truth about the Iraq war and what Mr Bush has shown the world: it is all about having the strongest military and using it for your own interests. Who is strong is always right and can laugh about the United Nations or international treaties. Just imagine how many countries will arm themselves now...

All this makes me feel really sad. I don't think the American people desserve the reputation their government earned them recently. There are so many great contributions the USA always made to the world for two centuries. But one government showing a big middle finger to international law sadly is enough to make many people forgot a lot of this

Yes, Jonathan, it does. I'll cite my case as an example.

By brother in-law is in the military. Fortunately, he's not yet been called to active duty in the Middle East.

If he was killed while on duty over there, I would be *much* more angry than if he was killed on duty for a war that I agreed with.

Okay then...I was reading this--

"Isolationist attitude? We funded and supplied Saddam during our conflict with Iran. I think an isolationist attitude in this case would probably have caused none of this to occur in the first place."

--as if you thought I was saying we had an isolationist attitude during the Cold War. (I wasn't saying that) I think we actually agree.

You're right that we did partially cause this. We used to think that the enemy of our enemy was our friend! (Think of who we supported during the Cold War.) Now, I think we've learned otherwise and we're correcting those past mistakes, or at least attempting to. We have a bad track record, no doubt about it, and that's why there are so many who doubt our intentions still. I can't blame them either, but now we have to show them that we won't be leaving the "evil" alone when it doesn't bother us, like we did in the past. (Although I'm very afraid that Kerry WOULD try to leave it alone and "swat flies" instead, if you want to put it that way.)

Anyway...didn't mean to get into lecture mode, but that's how I see it and I know I'm not alone. I'm not a Republican btw, I voted for Clinton and came VERY close to voting for Gore in 2000.

Anshe: Wow, where to begin... I'm sorry to hear all that, but there seems to be some misinformation there.

To keep this short I'll just say:

Who did the US lie to? Everyone was saying Iraq had WMDs, all the way to Ted Kennedy. WMDs aren't the only reason Iraq was invaded, btw. But to say it is oil-related...well, put it this way: it seems to me that only the conspiracy theorists, pure US haters (under all circumstances), and extremist socialists are saying that now. If you're none of those (I assume you're not), then this is the first time I've heard that from a normal person in some time.

Ignored the UN - Hmm, well the US did go to the UN first but they STILL weren't ready to go after Iraq after it's violation of 17 UN resolutions over 12 years. How much longer did they want to wait? It turns out that they probably would have waited forever--France had ulterior motives, etc.

Unilateral - Eh? Nah! Look how many countries are helping out in Iraq right now, and how many support the US-lead "war on terror"... you might be surprised. Is getting the support of France, Russia and Germany really THAT important? Also look at the UN oil-food program corruption...gee, thanks UN, really helped the world out there.

Mention of election 2000 - Well the US is a republic, not really a democracy. We could debate the electoral college, why it exists (etc) forever, but the fact is that the popular vote doesn't really matter. Been like that for over 200 years.

Not a flame btw, just wanted to keep it as brief as possible, so sorry if it came off that way.

The whole world when Powell did that ridiculous presentation at the U.N.



Maybe everybody whom FOX NEWS allowed to comment on the topic. The people who should know, U.N. weapons inspectors in Iraq, never ever made such claims. Nor did governments or experts in other countries. You should question the quality and neutrality of the media you consume.



Of course not. When Iraq *really* had WMD the U.S. even kept supplying more and watched Hussein use them against Kurds and Iran.

Reasons people outside the U.S. consider more likely:

- Iraq has lots of oil
- Iraq's neighbours have lots of oil
- US military and military industry need business, so they need some enemies and a war
- US wants to expand military bases in the middle east, e.g. because Saudia Arabia asked the US to leave
- Iraq did business with Russia, France, Germany and China but not with US and Britain
- Iraq was the first OPEC country trading oil in Euro instead of US$
- Bush has a personal issue
- Haliburton needs business
- Israel wants its neighbours weakened

Reasons people outside the US consider propaganda:
- WMD - proven wrong
- Democracy - Why should US care? They did not even install democrady in Kuweit after "liberating" it.
- Al Quaida - proven wrong
- Saddam's crimes - Most people he killed he already killed in the 80s and the US did not care but instead was very good friends with Saddam. Why should they suddenly care now?




It is all over mainstream media, it is everywhere in political analysis - outside the US. It is absolutely obvious. It is even in the strategic analysis US politicians like Wolfowitz or Rumsfeld published before Bush was elected.



You should rethink what you consider "normal". If you look at world population of 6000 million people, then the minority of 280 million consumers of Fox News and CNN is according to statistics not "normal". But maybe you consider Americans "normal" and everybody else not. So please consider me a "not normal" person then

If there is a conflict between two parties, I would try to obtain analysis from a third neutral party. Hehehe, maybe you can try Swiss media. But you will be frustrated: it is full of comments on US oil interests



Ok. So Hitler goes to UN and asks for resolution to invade Poland. The UN refuses, then Hitler invades Poland alone. It is ok, yes, because Hitler talked to the UN before?

Israel violated more than 30 UN resolutions over 50 years. Does Russia have the right to invade Israel now to enforce those resolutions?

France and Russia had ulterior motives, yes, same motives as the US and Britain: oil and strategic influence. The only difference is that it was US and Britain who broke international law and invaded and occupied a sovereign country, bombing cities, killing thousands of innocent children. Believe me, when people are bombed they don't care if the government of your country was elected or appointed. All they feel is pain and hate



"war on terror" is not war in Iraq. Two different stories.

The only countries with troops remaining in Iraq I am aware of is the US/UK and countries who are in one way or another dependent on good relations with the US. But what really counts is what people think. Polls have shown a vast majority of people in all those other countries do not support their countries' involvement.

But fact remains it was an illegal invasion of a sovereign country. It would have been legal for China or Russia or any other country to deploy troops in Iraq to help defend against the invaders. The invaders being your government.



I guess not. US has the better weapons.



The republic is corrupt. Time for the emperor!



Sure sure. Ask somebody in Iraq about Iraqi government and you will get a similar answer.

There are different countries, different people and different ideas about how to be governed. US is trying to impose their point of view and their values on others. By brute force. This is not right. You are trying to play God or world dictatorship.

But then again... if the Bush government will ever install a real sovereign democracy in Iraq I am going to fly to the Moon... How people can be so naive after the US has installed a monarchy in Kuweit is truly beyond me, sorry :-/

No offense, but now you have read another perspective. If you doubt me, I can give you links to non-US mainstream media...

In other news:
http://www.politicscafe.com/forum/index.php?board=5;action=display;threadid=1368

Piss and moan all you want. I personally found the above heartening. That is America. Let's see frenchie do something similar. Point is, we are there. For good reason or bad. But we ARE there. At least we're doing a wee bit of good.

Anyone else serve? Or is this a thread of freeloaders? Btw, nice original post, that troll sure pulled a lot of you under his bridge with a one-line non-statement.


And tonights final newsbite:
My solution. Let's pull out, NOW, today, this very minute. Let's beat the Spanish <llPlaySound("cluck cluck", 1.0);> on getting out! Then let's go back to our isolationist, pre-wwii, roots.

Then maybe after a week or two we can go invade france for their oil, bread and cheese.

Boso, the insurrectionist midget

Mmmm, I prefer fresh first hand information from people who are currently there and who don't get paid by Bush government

http://www.wildfirejo.blogspot.com/

Dunno what can be more authentic than the account of an Australian volunteer trying to help save lives in Falluja, under immense risk. I really admire her, I don't think I would ever have that courage...

Just think if this happened to us...
Another country comes in to our most established city bombs the hell out of it, runs through the streets with guns and what ever else toy they can come up with. Then says ohhh yeah now you have to change you government or else/

YEs their leader was a bad man or was he..... He was a leader trying to run a country, a country that is pore and under established. You try it once! He did not have any stockpiles like we said so what was he suppose to give up to keep this war from happening? He was Powerless. He was not the one to send plains to our country. He "may have" harbored terrorist but what county hasn't?

WHy I say! This is a city just like our own cities here with people just like our own. HOw I ask! Can people be so evil so down right mean as to go in to a struggling country and think that WAR will help?

AS we Americans stand idly by and watch powerless to stop our government or to naive to care feel safe? Feel happy to be an American. We are free? Lets make the world free right?

I am not up on most world affairs it makes me to sad to watch But I do think we should be smart enough to avoid War by now. Instead of blaming someone else for what happened to our country we should take a long hard look at our selves and say did our leaders invite it?



OK done now...... sorry needed to get that off my chest please let this stay in the forums. SL is too much fun to bring this in))

Thank you for reading Hope i did this right my first time

Ah but you missed the main point.

Would you be more angry, if he was killed in a war you disagreed with and the army was pulled out and failed its objective or stayed and was succesful.

One way he died for something you disagreed with and even the goals were not accomplished, the other way he died for something you disagreed with but at least there is a chance for a stable democracy and peace in the ME...

JV

Either way Jonathan, one of my relatives would be dead for something that I did not agree with. I'm pissed. Mission accomplished or not, I'm still pissed.

Trying to justify their death as something less awful *if* we finish what we began is almost insulting.

The good thing is that time will reveal all. We may be on opposite sides of the argument with regard to this war, but when time unveils the truth about it, we'll both be able to view it through similar lenses.

I've heard all of those arguments before, the double standards and so on...it's all trash. Still don't know which "lie" you're referring to...?

Do you think Bush outright lied, or that he was given inaccurate information? (Well, I think I know the answer.) I guess we can't blame people for considering the US "evil", considering the past during the Cold War and such...ah well.

Inspectors...well, David Kay may disagree with you there:
(these are highlights)

-We have discovered dozens of WMD-related program activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations during the inspections that began in late 2002.

-A prison laboratory complex, possibly used in human testing of BW agents, that Iraqi officials working to prepare for UN inspections were explicitly ordered not to declare to the UN.
In addition to the discovery of extensive concealment efforts, we have been faced with a systematic sanitization of documentary and computer evidence in a wide range of offices, laboratories, and companies suspected of WMD work.

-The pattern of these efforts to erase evidence -- hard drives destroyed, specific files burned, equipment cleaned of all traces of use -- are ones of deliberate, rather than random, acts.

Of course we know inspectors didn't find actual WMDs, or there would be no debate. It's amazing how much more can be done when you don't have a sneaky dictator working against you at the same time. But even then it still took awhile for US troops to find Saddam.

Iraq's neighbors were also afraid he had nasty toys, even Aljazeera has said it:

"Some [Iraqi] detainees said they believed that the toppled leader feared losing face with his Arab neighbours whom he thought paid him deference because they were afraid he had such arms."

Bush invaded a country for oil and Halliburton, to help our economy (never mind the great risk to his re-election), and to build military bases in an area we're already getting oil from to begin with? I don't buy this stuff, there is no logic in it and I've never seen a decent argument for them.

The UN never would have been in favor of invading Iraq, certainly not even after 17 Iraqi violations over 12 years. Well, maybe they would have, after we confirmed that Iraq had WMDs because Saddam decided to use them on someone. But the UN was too busy taking bribes and payoffs from Saddam to notice.

I love how the "anti-imperialists" bring up Israel's UN violations. I guess it's a point...but then again Israel is surrounded by people that hate it and want them all dead. And they are trying to defend themselves--not throw people into shredders for fun or play "hide and seek" with weapons inspectors.

Is it just me or does pointing out Israel's UN violations to say "The UN has no credibility anyway, so the resolution violations were not a good reason to invade Iraq." and then saying "Well, the US should have gotten UN approval to invade first." seem a little...odd and contradicting? I do think more pressure should be put on Israel, but to imply that Israel and Iraq were similar is just crazy.

I guess many don't realize that the war on terror changed US foreign policy. Again: we used to believe that the enemy of our enemy was our friend. We were wrong--this can explain alot if you think about it. Things have changed in recent years, that's why democracy and freedom in Iraq matters now. The theory is that if we liberate 50 million people and give them a chance to have freedom of their own, they'll be on our side and will help us fight the "war on terror".

Cierrah:
I disagree...read up about his atrocities and it'll be clear how much poor poor Saddam cared about his people.

Poor Saddam...he was just trying to mind his own business and wasn't hurting anyone and waaaaaaaaAAAAAAAAAA! the evil US went and invaded him for no reason...and killed Iraqi women and children just so their economy would improve...and is trying to install a democracy to replace his dictatorship....waaaaaaaaa! *sob*

(Sorry for the sarcasm, but it's just too funny.)

We aren't the one's who declared war, the Islamic extremists have been at war with us for some time, it's only now that we've actually started to fight back for real.

Edit: typo