Iraq - Better or Worse?

[shinerbock]

No, I haven't sacrificed anything either, but its not my country thats fighting for its life. If this country came under some ruthless dictator killing people who didn't agree with them, I think I'd believe sacrifice was worth the possibility of retaining/regaining freedom. However, if they don't want it, maybe you're right, dude, maybe we just don't get it. They don't want our help, lets pull out. We should start today. We'll tell the UN to pack up and get the hell out of the US by 6pm. Perhaps we'll send out a memo to all the countries who survive off the United States that the bank is officially closed. Tommorow, when Iraq blows up into a full scale civil war, we'll watch on TV. Of course at this point, the UN or some other worthless body of appeasing and pathetic "diplomats" will beg the US to act, but we won't. We'll sit back and wait on the security that comes with not being involved. I'm sure this will solve our problems. Hell, we'll probably get thank you letters from Iraqis, saying things like "Thanks so much for leaving, as a result, we have abundant resources, the sand has sprouted into fields of grass, and everyone is getting along beautifully." Of course, there will probably be mass executions and such, but who cares dude, because we just don't get it. Like, for real.

[_Opi_]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

What reality do you live in? It may be a situation the war brought to the surface, but just to go a back a few years, I hazard a guess that Saddam's treatment of Shi'ites over the decades contributed to it as well. It a centuries-old conflict.

When did this conflict begin--and by the I mean the insurgency and the civil war ---before or after occupation? Justify it how you want--whatever helps you sleep better at night. I call it out like I see it.

Shinerbock,

Iraq is at a point of no return. I'd doubt there's anything anyone can do now. Creating checkpoint, like in Palestine, will not solve anything. It didnt help in other countries, and it's not going to help Iraq. Yes, pulling out seems like a good plan because "we" did everything we could, right?

[shinerbock]

Iraq isn't at a point of no return, the United States is at a point of no turning back. Like any other struggle, certain elements had to be broken down in order to hopefully edify the backbone of the country for the future. What has to be done is that Iraq must start stepping up to the plate, and I think we may actually see that in the not too distant future. I personally don't have a problem with leaving, if thats what the country really wants. Do I think it would be a waste? Yes. Do I think there is still a strong chance for Iraq's future? Yes.
However, if they truly want their country to spiral further out of control, which will absolutely happen if the U.S. leaves, then lets go. People talk about Iraq being worse off than it was under Saddam, which I think is probably ridiculous. Ask the Kurds. If you really want to see how bad it can get, wait until the U.S. gives up on the country.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by _Opi_

When did this conflict begin--and by the I mean the insurgency and the civil war ---before or after occupation? Justify it how you want--whatever helps you sleep better at night. I call it out like I see it.

You said, "the Shiites and the Sunnis fighting each other is a situation we created." That is a demonstrably false statement. I will grant you that the invasion and occupation helped create the environment for the current insurgency and possible civil war. But that simply is not the same as the broad statement that "the Shiites and the Sunnis fighting each other is a situation we created" (emphasis mine), which implies they've always lived in relative peace and harmony until we came along.

Feel free to call it as you see it, however narrow that sight may be.

[_Opi_]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

the invasion and occupation helped create the environment for the current insurgency and possible civil war.

Helped in a significant way. This is essentially my point. If you are saying that the government knew the shiite/sunnis were not living peacefully side by side, then they should have been able to foresee this civil war ---or the possibility of a major conflict?

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by _Opi_

Helped in a significant way. This is essentially my point. If you are saying that the government knew the shiite/sunnis were not living peacefully side by side, then they should have been able to foresee this civil war ---or the possibility of a major conflict?

If that is your point, then say that. Don't say that the "fighting" between Sunnis and Shi'ias is a situation we "created" if what you mean is we helped, significantly or otherwise, create the environment in which already existing tensions could grow into fighting.

That's all I'm saying.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by _Opi_

Helped in a significant way. This is essentially my point. If you are saying that the government knew the shiite/sunnis were not living peacefully side by side, then they should have been able to foresee this civil war ---or the possibility of a major conflict?

This is quite circular with the original point of this thread (aka "better or worse?"), because the thing keeping open hostility between the two groups at bay was . . . oppressive dictatorship from one side, and associated fearmongering and death.

This really gives the question a lot more depth than most posts acknowledge, in my mind.