[Shinrei]

I take a small bitter measure of pride in having been against the Iraq war from the beginning. (Only 20% of Americans agreed with me according to one estimate I remember). Operations in Afghanistan, fine, I just didn't buy the propaganda leading up to Iraq and in the end I was proven right.

I was also for pulling troops out as quickly as possible, but that obviously didn't happen.

My heart is still saying the Iraq war is terrible (which it is).

But now my head is saying something different. I don't think the US should leave Iraq. We made an enormous mess. The corruption in the rebuilding effort is impossible to ignore.

But the truth is, the US troops and others in Iraq are genuinely trying to make things peaceful and get infrastructure up and running again. I just can't help but believe that if the US just up and pulled out, that area of the world will just go up in flames or Iraq will just implode into a black hole of horror. Regardless of how bad it is, I think there is a much better chance of things righting themselves if the US remains there as opposed to leaving behind the mess we made.

At this point I'd like to elect a president who would pledge to stay and right things in Iraq AND pledge not to start any more conflicts. There isn't a single candidate like that. McCain wants to stay in Iraq, but he also enjoys rattling sabres at Iran and others. And of course Obama and Clinton want to withdraw.

Comments? Opinions? Counseling accepted.

[Optimus Prime]

I was against it from the start. Baby Bush just wanted to succeed where his daddy failed. Now we're stuck there. Where are the weapons of Mass Destruction??!!? We still don't have those...pathetic.

[Goaswerfraiejen]

I agree. The US, Australia, and Britain have a moral obligation to fix what they broke.

[Aptorian]

On the subject of beginning the war. I doubt there was that many intelligent people who believed that America was invading Iraq solely on the basis of intelligence reports about WMDs.

At first I believed it was a part of an ungoing plan, that the US wanted to refashion the Middle East. First Afganistan, the Iraq and perhaps later Iran and Syria, possibly even Saudi Arabia. I don't know if they ever actually had such plans, but they've done a lovely job of screwing the place up. The whole "America stealing all the Oil" conspiracy is of course bullshit.

I also like the idea that the Iraq war was actually the son finishing what the father started. That there really was a lingering animosity towards Saddam in the White House and Washington after Desert Storm. It's a scary thought, countries keeping a grudge.

Possibly it was an important attack on a terrorist source. Whether or not Iraq really was churning out new terrorists or helping fund camps in other parts of the world is anyones guess.

The bottom line is that America, with the reluctant help of the rest of the world, removed a man who in the eyes of the western world was a dictator and murderer. A tyrant who openly mocked the wests influence.

The philosophical question there is whether we have any right to invade countries in the middle east or dispose of their so called opressors. The middle east is the middle east and the west is the west. There is a difference in culture and who are we to determin what the ruler of another country can or can not do? This is a hypothetical question regarding culture, not Iraqs position in the UN or the political presence of Iraq in the middle east.

I have a sort of cosmopolitan/cynical view on the world in general and I don't believe we have any buisness medling in other cultures affairs. Not unless we decide to do something decisive on the subject, which in itself is a scary prospect. You'd need to go all Roman Army on the general population to install complete order in Iraq, cullings, internment, displacement and still it probably wouldn't stop the insurgents in Iraq, or as they should really be called, the freedom fighters of Iraq. And yet, from a cosmopolitan view, who says might doesn't make right? If America has the power and the will to invade another country, it's their buisness. Sitting up here in Scandinavia where everything is lovely and peacefull it's hard to care one way or another. Crush a divers culture that has as much right to exist as the western philosophy or accept it and watch the medievel times spread through out Africa and Asia?

But all that is what if's. America is in Iraq now and it can't just pull out. Think about it, what would be the political result.

A) America would be viewed as having lost the war, another Vietnam. America would appear weak in the eyes of the world and this might in turn spark a renewed effort against American and United Nations posts across the world.

Billions and billions of dollars and human lives have been spent in the effort to make Iraq a democracy. How do you justify pulling out of Iraq now, with no result? The families of the dead soldiers would have lost their sons and daughters for nothing. It's political suicide.

C) Finally, what would happen to Iraq if America just pulls out? Would it survive or would it fall into anarchy and likely soon become a country ruled by the same fanatics that are sitting in Iran and Pakistan? This is not an acceptable solution.

America is caught in a war they can't win but they can't afford to lose. It's not a popularity contest.

[Optimus Prime]

Pretty good summary Apt. Like I said...we're kind of trapped now.

We've got kids 7 years younger than me dying over there, or coming back missing pieces of their bodies...or worse...it's fucking awful.

America needs to focus on it's own problems and stop trying to strong arm the middle east. If we want a cause worth fighting for...try Darfur. The genocide going on in Africa is a human problem......something we should all try to help...


ooo...Apt I put you at 299 Rep.....scary....

[Shinrei]

Great post Apt.

What happens though, if the one who gets the white house pulls troops out? Popular sentiment is against the war now (if you believe polls), because we hear about the terrible things that are happening and about soldiers dying etc. But these well meaning peace advocates don't seem to address your (Apt's) A B and C. It's just popular opinion swaying from one end to the other.

[Mentalist]

heh...

as bad as it sounds, the dictatorship kept the country together...
If US pulls out, the Kurds will try to assertin independence (and they just got a nice little precedent in kosovo)
If that happens, Turkey, that considers the very idea of Kurdistan a capital offense, will invade it. Iran will once again try to assert its dominance over fellow Shiites, who are the majority of what's left. In the middle of it all, the Sunnis will prolly get massacred as collaborators with Saddam.

US once again started something it does not have the capacity of fininshing--it has no way to instanteneously graft Western democratic values in the Middle East and in the process they demolished the very precarious local balance.
Like Apt, I am a total cultural relativist when it comes to politics, and I am convinced that you can't give democracy.human rights/etc to people who don't want them. As such, most of US foreign policy seems ludicrous to me.

[Optimus Prime]

Well I'm a believer that with great power, comes great responsibility.

I want the US to try and help other countries, but not through these means.

[Cold Iron]

Um... you don't break the eggs and then not eat the omelette.

[Optimus Prime]

Very true CI, very true.

How convenient for Captain Idiot that he's about to leave office and leave the next poor schmuck with this mess....

[Mentalist]

Xander;279996 said:

Well I'm a believer that with great power, comes great responsibility.

I want the US to try and help other countries, but not through these means.

no offence, but that stinks of the "manifest destiny" idea.... and I am firmly against that for any nation in the world.

[Optimus Prime]

kud13;280012 said:

no offence, but that stinks of the "manifest destiny" idea.... and I am firmly against that for any nation in the world.

None taken, because you're not getting what I'm saying

"Help" as in aid, not military might or conversion to our ways/beliefs etc....

Like AIDS relief to Africa, for instance.

[Cold Iron]

Mess? HA! This is a political GIFT. The next administration gets to reap the benefits while easily deflecting any blame onto the previous administration.

You want to know the truth? The Bush administration has done the one thing that most political parties and companies don't bother to do. Think ahead. Without clearing the way for Iraqi oil, we would be in even more trouble than we already are. The hard reality is, Bush saved our ass, and we all want to stand on the sidelines, quietly admonishing, looking innocent and reaping the benefits.

ETA: It's a hard pill to swallow, but if you drive a car, you're supporting Bush.

[Optimus Prime]

Bush saved nobody's ass.....no matter how you spin it....sheesh...put the crack pipe down CI

He did help the next Pres look better initially, I suppose. But sadly, the American public has a short memory....

[Cold Iron]

No, I didn't mean look better by comparison, I meant look better because of the oil money coming in. Bush saved your ass because you need the oil he got for you.

[Optimus Prime]

I don't even own a car

My bike doesn't use oil as far as I know....

[Mentalist]

Xander;280014 said:

None taken, because you're not getting what I'm saying

"Help" as in aid, not military might or conversion to our ways/beliefs etc....

Like AIDS relief to Africa, for instance.

Ah, well, that, yes, I agree--the West fucked over its former colonies big time, and here i'm fairly certain thee should be certain moral obligations to clean up numerous messes.

As for the whole oil point of CI--so are you saying that if Iraq still controlled their oil, it would've been more expensive? why?
Besides, while he may have alleviated short-term consequences this way,, he and his administration didn't do much to deal with the systemic problems...

[Cold Iron]

Xander;280021 said:

I don't even own a car

My bike doesn't use oil as far as I know....

Did you build it out of sticks?

kud13;280022 said:

As for the whole oil point of CI--so are you saying that if Iraq still controlled their oil, it would've been more expensive? why?

A million reasons. Without a west friendly administration the price is fixed at their rate, not ours and the supply is not stable, it can be interrupted by violence or embargoes, causing price spikes. Without stable cheap supply of oil, our industries are not secure. Without security you have bare markets, people keep their money tight.

Quote

Besides, while he may have alleviated short-term consequences this way,, he and his administration didn't do much to deal with the systemic problems...

You're right. I said they thought ahead, but not very far. They haven't saved our asses, just postponed our downfall.

[Optimus Prime]

All the oil I use to keep my bike in good shape is from the 70's.

IN YO FACE!



I'm just being difficult.

I wonder how long after he leaves office will Bush realize that he was the closest thing to the Antichrist.

[Mentalist]

Well, If he wanted a stable supply, why not stage another coup in Venezuela, or just take out the Saudis--the world's biggest supplier?
Seriously, it's not like Saddam was the worst of the bunch...