What do we do now?

[Sunstone]

What do we do now in Iraq?

I am not interested in a debate over the various reasons we went into Iraq. That's all water under the bridge. But now that we're there, what do we do? Should we stay until Iraq is strong enough to take on the insurgency on its own? Or should we leave as soon as possible? Are we winning in Iraq? Or are we loosing? What do you think?

 

[Quiddity]

The longer we stay, the more we and they can understand each other. The more we understand each other, the less threat we may be toward each other. To leave would denture possibilities of the Iraqi people to understand people of the west. Democratizing the Iraqis is an extremely long process if there is any chance at all. I don't think this is the route to take. I think understanding each other is a better route.

~Victor

 

[Aqualung]

We should stay in and help them create a government and a national defence system so they can become self-suficient.

 

[Quiddity]

We should stay in and help them create a government and a national defence system so they can become self-suficient.

Do you think them being "self-sufficient" will be sufficient enough for us to maintain a good relationship with them? Or will another dictator step in to only have it happen again.

~Victor

 

[Aqualung]

I don't know. I also didn't mean self-suficient, but I couldn't think of the word. What I meant was that they could defend their borders and maintain a governent. Which means that if they should ever turn toward dictatorship again, it should be their own choice. Then, if they choose to hate us again after we helped them set up their government, that's their fault, but I don't think it's our place to force them into indefinite friendly relations with us.

 

[Quiddity]

I don't know. I also didn't mean self-suficient, but I couldn't think of the word. What I meant was that they could defend their borders and maintain a governent. Which means that if they should ever turn toward dictatorship again, it should be their own choice. Then, if they choose to hate us again after we helped them set up their government, that's their fault, but I don't think it's our place to force them into indefinite friendly relations with us.

Force, no. I was only saying we understand each other while recognizing differences. I'm not sure if it will work, but Im open to whatever brings us closer to peace.

~Victor

 

[michel]

I may be in a negative frame of mind, but the longer we stay there, the more the problems continue. I don't even think we are seen as the bad guys anymore - just the reminders of those civillians killed by the bombing when we first went in.


What there is at the moment is a civil war - with us in the way. The longer this goes on, the more despised we are; there is no way to get the 'let's be friends' message across with Joe public - lets face it, we've seen where that gets us on the forum.

 

[Mike182]

in my honest opinion, we should replace british and american troops with UN troops. it's us making the decisions, and thats not right.

if the UN wants to call our troops in to use, thats fine, their call, but it shouldn't be britain or america in control of troop movements, it should be the UN until their is a stable and democratic government in iraq, and then it is their call

 

[Quiddity]

I may be in a negative frame of mind, but the longer we stay there, the more the problems continue. I don't even think we are seen as the bad guys anymore - just the reminders of those civillians killed by the bombing when we first went in.


What there is at the moment is a civil war - with us in the way. The longer this goes on, the more despised we are; there is no way to get the 'let's be friends' message across with Joe public - lets face it, we've seen where that gets us on the forum.

I hope you are right Michel. But what if leaving now will cost more lives? You ever thought about it that way? If we leave, they remain with the same thoughts and with the same bitter taste. Only to have them cause a war later in the future. I know this is speculation, but I don't think I'm far off.

~Victor

 

[Quiddity]

democratic government in iraq,

I have spoken to many Iraqi friends and they hate that the U.S. is trying to do this.

~Victor

 

[michel]

I hope you are right Michel. But what if leaving now will cost more lives? You ever thought about it that way? If we leave, they remain with the same thoughts and with the same bitter taste. Only to have them cause a war later in the future. I know this is speculation, but I don't think I'm far off.

~Victor

You are not going to convince them that there is anything good about us; the best we can hope for is tollerance. Culturally and theologically we aren't even on the same planet. Mutual respect has to be earned; I don't think either side has anything much to boast about.

 

[Quiddity]

You are not going to convince them that there is anything good about us; the best we can hope for is tollerance. Culturally and theologically we aren't even on the same planet. Mutual respect has to be earned; I don't think either side has anything much to boast about.

Although I don't know how we will earn mutual respect when they don't see anything good in us. Is leaving the answer?

~Victor

 

[michel]

Although I don't know how we will earn mutual respect when they don't see anything good in us. Is leaving the answer?

~Victor

I don't think it will help, but I think we just create more angst the longer we stay.

 

[greatcalgarian]

What do we do now in Iraq?

I am not interested in a debate over the various reasons we went into Iraq. That's all water under the bridge. But now that we're there, what do we do? Should we stay until Iraq is strong enough to take on the insurgency on its own? Or should we leave as soon as possible? Are we winning in Iraq? Or are we loosing? What do you think?

If most Americans are honest with themselves and understand the true motive of Bush going into Iraq, the answer is quite simple.

US has to remain in Iraq, maintaining her influence in the middle east, and have a controlling say in the oil there. Balancing that with the sacrificing of US citizen there to maintain the present status quo is the Bush current agenda.

It is just like the Vietnam situation. When maintaining the puppet South Vietnamese government (for surrounding the China communist threat to US interest) is no longer required, as the original perceive threat is no longer in existence, or the situation has changed that it is not possible to do, then withdrawal will be executed, and the unfortunate president that has to do that will be credited as being the one who bear all the blame.

Since this is Bush second term, Bush is unlikely to be the one 'losing or winning' this war, I do not foresee US being defeated in Iraq or winning in Iraq, or US citizen demanding a withdrawal (like in Vietnam case), or that the presence of US there is no longer needed, for the next two to three years, I would forecast a stalemate with the insurgents/anti-occupation by foreign force nationalistic/religious/terrorist fighter there for this period. There is unlikely to be a withdrawal, and possibly, there may be a need to increase in US force there to maintain the appearance of US is controlling the situation and a democratically elected government is in place, exactly the same scenario like the Vietnam case around forty years ago.

A very sad situation. It would be better if US have negotiated in the back door and continue to support the dictator Sadam there (like what happened before, for example Iraq-Iran conflict, and also Saudi has to listen to every word of US for fear of Sadam achieving his dream of unifying the middle east under him as the empire there), which will allow US to have control over the middle east, putting all blames on Sadam when situation turn bad, but without requiring to go in and pick up the hot potato.

 

[almifkhar]

until americans fully realize the evil reasons why we went there and remain there than this question is useless.

we americans and brittish need to first do the right thing by exposing our top officals for the bad and evil men and women that they really are. that is the only way we could get any kind of creditability and respect from the iraqi people suffering in this situation. i feel that it is up to the iraqi people and the iraqi people alone to decide who they want to run their government and decide which kind of government they want to have. this is not for americans and brittish to decide. i feel that we americans and brittish should rebuild instead of destroy the infilstructure of this country, after all we were the ones who destroyed it.
but then again, i think that the whole purpose of our campagine in iraq is to africanize it. i don't believe for one minunte that bush and his pals want a stable country out of iraq for if they did, they would not drop depleted uranium bombs all over the country and rape and torture innocent men and women, destroy water and eletrical plants, let alone dictate what kind of government can and cannot reign supreme in this foreign soverign country.
but like i said before, the best thing we could do to make things right and to move things in the right and just way would be to expose our leaders and some of our troops for the war criminals that they are and make them pay for their actions.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

i don't believe for one minunte that bush and his pals want a stable country out of iraq for if they did, they would not drop depleted uranium bombs all over the country and rape and torture innocent men and women, destroy water and eletrical plants, let alone dictate what kind of government can and cannot reign supreme in this foreign soverign country.

Right. So American and British troops spend all their time randomly dropping depleted uranium bombs "all over", raping and torturing people, and deliberately destroying water and electrical plants. Oh, and Iraqis didn't draft and subsequently vote on their own constitution: no, the coalition "dictated" what their government would be.

but like i said before, the best thing we could do to make things right and to move things in the right and just way would be to expose our leaders and some of our troops for the war criminals that they are and make them pay for their actions.

I agree, all soldiers who abuse Iraqis should be punished. Like these guys, for example:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9492624/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6795956/

 

[retrorich]

What do we do now in Iraq?

I am not interested in a debate over the various reasons we went into Iraq. That's all water under the bridge. But now that we're there, what do we do? Should we stay until Iraq is strong enough to take on the insurgency on its own? Or should we leave as soon as possible?

Having pretty much destroyed Iraq, we now have a moral responsibility to help rebuild it and enable it to defend itself. Once we have achieved that, we should get the hello out of there, and mind our own business in the future.

Are we winning in Iraq? Or are we loosing? What do you think?

The Iraq invasion was and is a no-win situation. I hope we have learned something from that terrible mistake.

 

[Fluffy]

I have spoken to many Iraqi friends and they hate that the U.S. is trying to do this.

If they disagree with the way the US has tried to do this then fair enough. If they dislike the idea of a democratic Iraq then they are on rocky ground. Majority will rule how it will. If their are enough Iraqis who feel like a dictatorship then a democracy will allow them to have it. If there are not, then they should not be oppressed, even if 49% if Iraqis disagree.

 

[michel]

i feel that it is up to the iraqi people and the iraqi people alone to decide who they want to run their government and decide which kind of government they want to have.

hello, isn't the voting that has taken place exactly what that is all about?

 

[michel]

The Iraq invasion was and is a no-win situation. I hope we have learned something from that terrible mistake.

i couldn't agree more; the trouble is that man is extraordinarily slow at learning........