Wednesday, January 25, 2006

 

Implications of America in Iraq?

On the whole, is the world made worse or better as a result of America invading Iraq?

Comments:
Certainly, the world is made better.

The world is always made better, aspiring to something more, evolving into a state of being never before imagined and never again to be repeated.

No matter how terrible things may seem at any given moment.

No matter how evil some men may appear.

It is all for the same glorious end.

That the world may begin again.
 
Heh, I was wondering if this question was going to be asked, although I didn't actually think it would.

The problem, however, is that we don't know what would have happened had we not invaded Iraq. There are many people who support the war, and even more who don't. What did we give up as a result of invading Iraq? What is the greater alternative? I don't know, and I'm not sure how to measure or weigh the good and bad of the invasion relative to the rest of the world.
 
i dont think in the world as a whole it matters. except for a few countries the rest of the world is not involved. it is like another civil war in a far off place to most.
LV
 
many births many births all die. Many births many births many kill. Many births many births all die.
 
If there is slightly less suffering in the world as a result of Sadaam being removed from power, then the world, as a whole, is better...especially if we are becoming more and more like a global village as some imply. Think of it like improving one room in a large house.
 
As always, there are pros and cons.

Pros:

Many if not most Iraqi citizens seem to be happy with the change in government. A very bad man is gone.

America has one foot in the Middle East for future activities. You can bet the new Iraq will allow a base of U.S operations on some remote part of the country.

Cons:

No one will ever worry about deficit spending and national debt until the dollar collapses and then the finger pointing will start. This drain on the economy has the potential for big problems.

Respect and credibility for America has suffered internally and externally, at least among world citizens. Government thinking tends to be a bit more pragmatic.

Somewhere in between:

When this whole thing was gearing up, something just didn't seem right. It seemed rushed, almost an act of desperation. The reasoning was seemingly sound, but Hans Blix would have eventually provided enough hard evidence for some sort of cooperative intervention. Instead, The U.S. hurried things along and I'm not convinced the search for WMD's was the reason. If there is another that was concealed from the public, then only time will tell.
 
Definitely worse.
There were no WMDs.
No links with Islamic militants.
We all know the real reason; oil.
All the rest are lies.
The more you kill for your material interests, the more you create angry people ready to do anything for revenge.
People who support the American yobbos are greedy and ignorant racists.
Bush is a puppet for the rich.
 
As Jimmy Carter said, the actions of the US has given excuses for other dictations around the world to act worse - not better.

As for killing lots of innocent people to get your own way, this can almost never be good. If enough aid and help if provided to the Iraqi's, perhaps, and only perhaps, this will smother the suffering and make them not as angry. But in 30 years time, because of the actions of the US, Iraq will still be suffering some problems. The best way to solve problems is with non voilent means. Often times problems take just as long to solve as with violence, but in the end, there is no one left who is angry, because no violent acts occured.

So the world is definately worse off. Less understanding, less caring, more violence. This is not the way to solve problems.
 
Well if you think 'America' invaded Iraqi, the question is quite baited. As the question is posed, it strikes of a suggestion that the action to enter into a military engagement with the Iraqi Regime was not endorsed by the U.N. security council and was unilateral, niether of which in fact was not the case. However, giving 25,000,000+ people freedom is a good thing, now weather they will choose 'liberty' or 'more tyranny' with that freedom is another story -- I would hope that we would all wish them LIBERTY. :)
 
There was an old man who had only one son. This was bad because the old man was frail, and there was work to be done on the farm. A neighbour helped by giving the old man his best horse. This was good. But when the son tried to break the horse, he was thrown and broke his leg instead. This was bad. And then a war broke out and all the young men left to fight. This was bad, but the son was saved because of his injury. This was good.

Will the war in Iraq leave the world a better place? That question is impossible to answer. All we can say with certainty is this:

More than 100 000 Iraqi civilians have died as a direct result of this war.

Collectively, the men behind the push to war have profited by hundreds of millions of dollars. They are the perpetrators of a terrible crime. If if good does arise from bad, it will not exonerate the guilty.

I believe you have asked the wrong question. This ongoing war is now a part of history. Will we choose to remember it for what it is, or will we re-write history, to suit our fantasies about the moral superiority of our own society?
 
In the interest of brevity I'll need to paint with a broad brush:

The world would be a better place had the UN Security Council put teeth into their sanctions & warnings against an Iraq that had been defeated in its bid to annex Kuwait. Let's everyone bear in mind that Saddam's regime was fundamentally belligerent. Saddam's regime thwarted, rejected & thumbed its nose at every attempt to pacify it over a twelve year period following the Gulf War. Iraqi anti-aircraft weaponry shot at US planes enforcing a no-fly zone. Etc., there is really no viable reason to give Saddam's Iraq the benefit of any of our doubts.

Having gone at it outside of UN blessing the world is worse off for the US having invaded Iraq. That's not the same question as whether or not Saddam's regime needed to be terminated (I won't hesitate to use a strong word here).

Let me say this. The world would be significantly worse off had the US, lacking UN blessing to enforce Securtiy Council resolutions, actually failed to invade Iraq &, by appeasement left the Saddam regime to its own devises.
 
I do not know if the world is a better place with the so called war in Iraq.
Only time will tell. We are committed with no end in sight.
 
This is one of those reeeeeeal stupid questions. We don't know what would have happened had we not, we only know what is happening at this moment, and we can't know what will take place in the future. My son is in the military,he believes he is doing something to help people that have had a boot on their necks for a long time. Regardless of the agenda that our so called self righteous leaders have, a society of supressed humanbeings now have the chance to control their on destiny. Until the very nature of man changes we wil always "find the cost of freedom buried in the ground".
 
better
 
Pertinent if true: acccording to Georges Sada, one of Saddam's military advisors, WMD's were shipped to Syria shortly before the invasion.
 
The World is worse off

But Iraq is better after the demise of Saddam. I don't think we needed to invade to accomplish this.
 
Worse, DU kills, and contaminates, so therefore "the world" has been made worse. Logic made simple.
 
The slain wont tell me their opinion. May I presume it?
 
Only good if this represents the beginning of the end of America's imperialistic phase. I think we bit off more than we can chew and invading Iraq went too far. We have squandered all of our goodwill, with respect to support to and from other nations.
I think what the 'War on Terror' is really about is the US declaring the right to do whatever it wants and anyone who would oppose us, either politically or militarily is declared a 'terrorist'. So it will never end.
But history books are full of countries who've adopted a similar stance, and they've all failed in one way or another.
When our empire falls, we'll give real democracy a shot.
 
"You can always hear the people who are willing to sacrifice somebody else's life. They're plenty loud and they talk all the time. You can find them in churches and schools and newspapers and legislatures and congress. That's their business. They sound wonderful. Death before dishonor. This ground sanctified by blood. These men who died so gloriously.

They shall not have died in vain. Our noble dead.

Hmmmm.

But what do the dead say?

Did anybody ever come back from the dead any single one of the millions who
got killed did any one of them ever come back and say by god I'm glad I'm dead because death is always better than dishonor? Did they say I'm glad I died to make the world safe for democracy? Did they say I like death better than losing liberty? Did any of them ever say it's good to think I got my guts blown out for the honor of my country? Did any of them ever say look at me I'm dead but I died for decency and that's better than being alive? Did any of them ever say here I am and I've been rotting for two years in a foreign grave but it's wonderful to die for your native land? Did any of them say hurray I died for womanhood and I'm happy see how I sing even though my mouth ~ choked with worms?
" - Dalton Trumbo - Johnny Got His Gun
 
johnx
All the dead soldiers that can not grow older, been asking after you.
 
Your question is revealing. How can killing a hundred thousand people ever be good?
 
Ask that question of one of the 2000+ American mothers who've lost their child to this war. Ask that question of the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians who've lost loved ones to this war.
How can the answer be anything other than negative?
The world is always diminished by war. In the case of our invasion of Iraq, we've managed to poke that hornet's nest enough times to completely enflame the region, bolster terrorist's efforts and generally put the world at great risk.
 
We have all become paranoid because of the Invasion of Iraq. This violent incursion into the Islamic world has left the technological West looking over its/their shoulder and preparing for betrayal from within. What might be undertaken otherwise?
 
worse. everything about the iraq invasion is wrong. where does one start? forget that there were no wmd. consider the 200 billion cost estimate that is now 2 trillion. or the soldiers pushed to the limit without proper support or protective equipment. and the "other war" being fought in afghanistan which is virtually unknown because of a media blackout. the war in iraq should truly be called a war on the u.s. We will all suffer in the long run for this terrible "mistake". at this point in time i can only quote the bible for comfort - "in a little while these powerful men will be gone". follow Christ while you still can. he said - "I came not to judge the world, but that they may have life, and have it more abundantly....". he is our hope for the future.
 
51% worse
49% better
 
I HEART America's foreign policy.
 
It would have been a lot less trouble just to take out Sadam.
 
This seems to be a silly question. Look at the state of things in Iraq. Look at the nearly innumerable lies used to invade and perpetuate the war in iraq. This is an illegal war, a war of economic provocateurs, colonists and empire builders spiced with the motivating mythos of apocalypse and armageddon. These american folks seem to want to poke jesus with a big stick as he continues to hibernate. Is it time for the second coming yet daddy...are we there yet daddy...drive faster daddy. America, the New Rome, rears its imperial head and wounds forever its basic premise and vision. Even if Iraq is ill founded revenge for 911 the hundred thousand innocents who have died surpass the ten to one revenge death ratio practised by the nazi german military against resistance fighters. If they really want armageddon I hope they realize that the towers of NYC fit the criteria prescribed by the biblical description of the city called the "whore of babylon"in Revelations. The god of the bible is a gambling, conundrum loving trickster and unfortunately for humanity, iraq and america, christianity and islam are his favoured chess pieces.
 
Is this a Galactic question, or a political question?
 
In a way it has made the Iraqi world a little bit better and we've caught some of the bad people, but I don't believe we'll be able to fix everything over there. We should do as much as we can and come home. Of course the innocent people dieing isn't a win.
 
I hate to say it, but Uncle George, Uncle Cheney, & Uncle Powell pulled the wool over my eyes in a major way-I fell for it.
We should have gone into Afghanistan, not gone into Iraq, & be in a position to better handle other more dangerous & pressing problems such as Iran & N.Korea.
And i'm not meaning invading those countries. I mean being able to present full force with more of the world behind us.
Not to mention 2600 dead & 20,000 wounded & running.
 
This is what I know now. According to reports, approximately 150,000 Iraqi & Americans have died. The number of wounded much higher.

There were no WMD's found.

The death toll, unrest, & terrorism is climbing.

The possibility of civil war is very real according to the U.S. & if that happens, the death toll quoted will probably look small.

At this point in time, I don't know of a country in the world, including the U.S. that wants this war.

This is October, 2006, & I have no idea how it will turn out, but I wouldn't bet three nickels on anything good. We'll see.
 
Suprisingly Al Qaeda is stronger than they were before.

After the next false terror attack, there will be martial law. I'd bet it will be before bush leaves office. Does America have any hope for freedom?
 
Post a Comment



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

eXTReMe Tracker