Staredit Network

When I was younger I always thought that the USm where I live was the biggest baddest country that no one could mess with. We had the power and everything was all good. Well growing up and learning just about the same facts I was pleased with the power the US had over other countries.

Though during the War in Iraq it seems that the underdog is making a pretty big fool out of the US. Ever since George Bush decided to no longer be declared in war with Iraq we have been losing this battle. We no longer can shoot at the enemies until shot apon. Kind of asking to wait to be killed in some cases. I think that Bush was a little too quick with taking that action and making the people over seas in an impossible situation.

How do you feel over the Power of the US and with regards on the War/Battle in Iraq

It's more of an occupation than it is a war. And occupations are not meant to last that long after a war.

How long do these occupations normally last, because if they last too much longer it will last a lot longer than the actual war did. It makes no sence to take that type of power away from the men fighting there.

I think the the Russians were in Afghanistan for like 10 years before they finally got out because the fanatics and insurgents wouldnt stop. I feel like us being in Iraq is prolly gonna be one of the same lessons the Afghans taught the Russians that being pessimistic.

Well, I think it would be a lot better if we decalared war on them and brought more troops in. Yes more troops isnt what people want, but thats what it takes and they will be in and out faster then having fewer over there longer.

Iraq is somewhat more complicated than a simple rebel. it has anti-american side, a Sunni side, a Shiite side, and a pro-american side on the Iraqi government. So its an all out civil AND liberation war for them llol.

I dont understand how they think we are so bad. We are over there for good even if it doesnt look like it, we are. Why dont they just welcome us?

Declare war on who - Iraq? That would be a little difficult - the current situation is covered by the umbrella of the 'War on Terror,' whatever that's suppose to be...

Well then do that, because whatever ew are doing now just isnt working, we need to look at this thing a little differently and look at the fact that we may not be doing this as esay or as fast as we could be and that it is possible that w could lose.

You wish. The fact is, the United States is over there to get oil, to set up a government that likes them and to sort of prove themselves on the world stage. Pure benevolence and altruism are way down the list.

It's impossible to win. You can't force the middle east to change, you just have to hope that they change themselves. So just let them be idiots and kill each other, they've been doing it for thousands of years.

I don't blame the Middle Eastern cultures for hating Americans. We're all greedy, lazy, exploitative gluttons who are trying to force our "ideals" (which many believe, including myself, that this is just a thin veil for our resource interests) on them.

We are not going to use the full power of our military on them for 2 reasons:
1. That would be very evil and cowardly, and it would give a more powerful nation the excuse to blow a chunk out of us in the name of "justice".
2. We would destroy the land that hold the resources we want from that country.

Well, I'm going to put myself in their situation. Let's say the Iraqis (pre-US invasion) entered the US to change our corrupt government for the better. Would I rebel? Yes. I don't think that it's shocking that they don't just bow down and submit to an endless occupation.

I agree, because we are basically in there for good. For them to kill what would be their future is dumb. They should let us do what we do and their life wil be better.

That's the thing. Are we making their lives better? Maybe for some, but definitely not all. Wonder why they're rebelling against us? We are doing something wrong. Think of it as a place with a bunch of eight-year-olds constantly fighting each other, they can work together and cooperate with you, but more than likely they won't, so it's wise to just leave them be.

The US doesnt have a corrupt government. The US follows the constitution as a guideline which is fairly fair. How is it corrupted?



They actually made their own lives worse by looting government items. The US tried to stop this but they kept looting and rebelling like idiots. I see many people seeing the US as bad people, but the US is actually trying to stop the Iraqis right now and trying to make peace. I'm sure they would leave after everything is settled down.

The only thing is that now we have basically put ourselves in between their civil war. Now if we leave the people rebelling will win and the whole thing would be a loss. The only good thing is that we got Saddam but we lost more in the overall picture. We need to stay and finish it even if its not what people want.;

I don't see why everyone here is so pro-occupation. It's not working and was never going to work. You're unable to empathise with the Iraqis because to do so requires a lot of detailed knowledge about the situation. As it is, we live in a world full of misinformation and your own view of Iraq is clouded heavily by your perspective (US values and ideals).

I am not pro-occupation. I am saying bring back the war and have more troops in Iraq and finish this thing. I think it would be better to add more for less time then less for longer time.

You mean like destroy them? The US is doing the best it can, but now since the stupid Democrats took over the Congress, they are actually doing bad! They want to bring back drafting to send more troops there, but the republicans were trying to end this war by trying to settle everything. They sent people to help rebuild the government.

I think we should bring more there and keep the govenment there steady then help them grow. Keeping less there makes no sence. Example - Keeping 2 BC's in an area will hold off a lot then adding one every minute would take a while to take control. Instead have about 10 BC's there and slowly take some out and put new ones in.

We are still sending troops there to keep stabilized. But you are saying this like the soldiers arent humans. They have families and friends who love them and need them. If we keep sending, how many more lives are we going to sacrifice for a country that is like 5000 miles away from us? We only went there to stop the weapons of mass destruction that we thought there was. We probably even went there for oil, but there is no real proof of this action.

Yes I know. I feel that we would save more by sending more over and having more control then just keeping just enough over there and stuff.

The war is over with, and the people of the country obviously don't want us there. So why the hell stay there?