Pull troops out of Iraq?
- Thread starter Krummhorn
- Start date
Stronghold
New member
I want so badly to say yes expecially after seing photos of wunded men and woman but I dont have enough information to make that decision are choice. You know I dont like to play God with other peoples lives and I know thay are in a living hell over their right now what a messed up part of the world but hay its preaty messed up even in America any more.
But what I can see is either a withdraw are diving in head first on to the next country and we all know wich one that is.
But what I can see is either a withdraw are diving in head first on to the next country and we all know wich one that is.
I tend to agree with you, Stronghold ... things are messy all over right now, even at the US border and Mexico (70 miles from where I live). I'm not sure the US accomplished anything being in Iraq, no WMD's were ever found ... ok, a tirant leader was found and for good or bad, he was put to death. But what about Bin Laden? All the worlds technological advances and yet nobody can find this individual?
I firmly believe that the US needs to solve its own internal problems before it attempts to solve the rest of the world's problems. Indeed, America is really messed up ... and the politicians seem to be oblivious of what is under their own noses.
I firmly believe that the US needs to solve its own internal problems before it attempts to solve the rest of the world's problems. Indeed, America is really messed up ... and the politicians seem to be oblivious of what is under their own noses.
Sybarite
New member
There never was a link between Iraq under Saddam and al-Queada and bin Laden. There were no WMD. There was no threat of a strike by Iraqi missiles hitting the UK in 45 minutes.
The electorates of the US and the UK were lied to by their duplicitous, warmongering leaders, who used such lies as an excuse to ignore the UN and launch an illegal war in a sovereign state.
Saddam was a nasty piece of work, but the US and the UK (and others) had helped him to stay in power for years because it suited them – particularly given his relationship with post-Shah Iran (another country that's hardly been helped by Western interference). Tony Blair cares so much for the Iraqi people that, in 1988, after Saddam gassed the Kurds at Halabja, Blair couldn't even spend the time to sign an Early Day Motion condemning the massacre in Parliament.
All that having been said, we're where we are now and there's no avoiding that. We cannot, IMO, simply walk away until the embryonic Iraqi government tells us that it can cope/to go (if that happens). To do otherwise would simply be like making a mess in someone else's house and then leaving without helping to clear it up.
What I'd also like to see – although I admit that this is highly unlikely – is Bush and Blair in the dock at the International Court in the Hague, facing charges of war crimes.
The electorates of the US and the UK were lied to by their duplicitous, warmongering leaders, who used such lies as an excuse to ignore the UN and launch an illegal war in a sovereign state.
Saddam was a nasty piece of work, but the US and the UK (and others) had helped him to stay in power for years because it suited them – particularly given his relationship with post-Shah Iran (another country that's hardly been helped by Western interference). Tony Blair cares so much for the Iraqi people that, in 1988, after Saddam gassed the Kurds at Halabja, Blair couldn't even spend the time to sign an Early Day Motion condemning the massacre in Parliament.
All that having been said, we're where we are now and there's no avoiding that. We cannot, IMO, simply walk away until the embryonic Iraqi government tells us that it can cope/to go (if that happens). To do otherwise would simply be like making a mess in someone else's house and then leaving without helping to clear it up.
What I'd also like to see – although I admit that this is highly unlikely – is Bush and Blair in the dock at the International Court in the Hague, facing charges of war crimes.
BethWagner
New member
I hope no one minds me adding my two cents to the matter. There are clearly some obvious flaws and lies in the previous posts that I would respectfully like to point out. Having worked for the President I hope I will be respected here and not ignored.
The first grave misconception of the general American public is that there were no WMD in Iraq. That is totally false. There were WMD in Iraq. That is fact, not just my personal peferance. One of the top advisors to Saddam Hussien, Gen. Georges Sada, has clearly documented that in his book, Saddam's Secrets, which I would encourage anyone to believe who thinks otherwise. I had my doubts about the war before I read that book. What happened to them? Quite plainly, they were removed from Iraq.
I believe the real problem here is selfishness. We want to believe it's a mess because we want to come home. We don't want to even make an attempt to help the Iraqis. People here in America don't realize that the mainstream media has an agenda, and that is playing as much bad footage about the war as they possibly can. Every day there footage of some soldier being killed or building being blown up, and I can assure that it is an attempt from the opposing forces to discourage us and try to make us go home. I'm not trying to say I have all the answers. I am merely pointing out that we need to focus on a solution that will work--not just cutting and running and making the sacrifice our fallen troops have given for naught.
There is many lies going around and it disgusts me to see how people just take and believe what they see on the night's news.
About Bin-Laden, I think it is very probable that he is dead. Of course I don't know that for a fact.
We hear all this hype about solving our own problems--getting Iraq isn't going to solve any of our problems here at home. As I mentioned, the motive is selfishness.
I want to say that I'm proud of our President and I don't think we deserve one as good as he is. He has faithfully led us through this very hard time. May I point out that at the invasion almost all Americans supported invading Iraq. Now that we're in there it's his fault. I encourage everyone reading this to truly find out the truth.
Bill
The first grave misconception of the general American public is that there were no WMD in Iraq. That is totally false. There were WMD in Iraq. That is fact, not just my personal peferance. One of the top advisors to Saddam Hussien, Gen. Georges Sada, has clearly documented that in his book, Saddam's Secrets, which I would encourage anyone to believe who thinks otherwise. I had my doubts about the war before I read that book. What happened to them? Quite plainly, they were removed from Iraq.
I believe the real problem here is selfishness. We want to believe it's a mess because we want to come home. We don't want to even make an attempt to help the Iraqis. People here in America don't realize that the mainstream media has an agenda, and that is playing as much bad footage about the war as they possibly can. Every day there footage of some soldier being killed or building being blown up, and I can assure that it is an attempt from the opposing forces to discourage us and try to make us go home. I'm not trying to say I have all the answers. I am merely pointing out that we need to focus on a solution that will work--not just cutting and running and making the sacrifice our fallen troops have given for naught.
There is many lies going around and it disgusts me to see how people just take and believe what they see on the night's news.
About Bin-Laden, I think it is very probable that he is dead. Of course I don't know that for a fact.
We hear all this hype about solving our own problems--getting Iraq isn't going to solve any of our problems here at home. As I mentioned, the motive is selfishness.
I want to say that I'm proud of our President and I don't think we deserve one as good as he is. He has faithfully led us through this very hard time. May I point out that at the invasion almost all Americans supported invading Iraq. Now that we're in there it's his fault. I encourage everyone reading this to truly find out the truth.
Bill
Sybarite
New member
The truth is, Iraq is a mess. Hundreds of thousands of people have died (although working out the toll is complicated by the fact that the invading forces have not abided by the Geneva Conventions that they are both signatories to and bothered to keep any semblence of count of the casualties).
The truth is, no WMD have been found since the invasion.
The truth is that the US and the UK (primarily) went ahead with an invasion of a soverign state without the backing of the UN, an organisation that both countries are supposed to be members of.
The truth is that you cannot go around the world attempting to impose your own brand of lifestyle/political organisation on other nations; there are plenty of examples in history to show exactly what happens.
The truth is that years of messing an interfering in the region, by the US, the UK and others, has contributed massively to the problems that we see today. We messed in Iran. We imposed a political leader. We helped keep him in power and then we all look gobsmacked when the people finally get rid of him and actually impose an extreme form of nationalist system. Then, just as they are trying to liberalise from within the way these things should happen a certain world leader starts rattling his sabre and waffling on about "the axis of evil". And then we wonder why the Iranian people, at the next electoral opportunity, opt for a more nationalist approach.
And as for the idea that the UK or US administrations (or the leaders thereof) care about the Iraqi people:
And as I said previously, Tony Blair cared so much about the Iraqi people that he couldn't even spend the time to sign an Early Day Motion in Parliament after Saddam gassed the Kurds at Halabja in 1988.
The truth is, no WMD have been found since the invasion.
The truth is that the US and the UK (primarily) went ahead with an invasion of a soverign state without the backing of the UN, an organisation that both countries are supposed to be members of.
The truth is that you cannot go around the world attempting to impose your own brand of lifestyle/political organisation on other nations; there are plenty of examples in history to show exactly what happens.
The truth is that years of messing an interfering in the region, by the US, the UK and others, has contributed massively to the problems that we see today. We messed in Iran. We imposed a political leader. We helped keep him in power and then we all look gobsmacked when the people finally get rid of him and actually impose an extreme form of nationalist system. Then, just as they are trying to liberalise from within the way these things should happen a certain world leader starts rattling his sabre and waffling on about "the axis of evil". And then we wonder why the Iranian people, at the next electoral opportunity, opt for a more nationalist approach.
And as for the idea that the UK or US administrations (or the leaders thereof) care about the Iraqi people:
And as I said previously, Tony Blair cared so much about the Iraqi people that he couldn't even spend the time to sign an Early Day Motion in Parliament after Saddam gassed the Kurds at Halabja in 1988.
eden
New member
Hey,
hope you dont mind me joining in here, normally I wouldn't discuss religion or politics but this thread really interested me. Being in the UK we are spoon fed what we are allowed to know in order to stir up enough controversy for EVERYONE to have their own personal "conspiracy theory" about Iraq supposedly the bottom line is we are trying to keep the peace and civilise a nation which is no easy task...and the troops job is to reinforce that peace....hmm what do you think?
hope you dont mind me joining in here, normally I wouldn't discuss religion or politics but this thread really interested me. Being in the UK we are spoon fed what we are allowed to know in order to stir up enough controversy for EVERYONE to have their own personal "conspiracy theory" about Iraq supposedly the bottom line is we are trying to keep the peace and civilise a nation which is no easy task...and the troops job is to reinforce that peace....hmm what do you think?
Ouled Nails
New member
Hello Krummhorn:
I voted "no" to your question because, in my opinion, an affirmative answer does require a timeline. The length of this timeline would depend on some very closely monitored conditions for troop removal. Every day, every week, the evidence in support of a continued presence of US-UK troops should consist, among other things, of a genuine buildup and growing involvement of Iraqi military forces. In other words, western troops should become not more but less obvious in the media, as casualties and as combatants. The rationale for a continued military presence should also be viewed less in military terms but increasingly in economic and social terms. If these trends are not noticeable in the months ahead, then I would tend to support the current Democratic initiatives. On the other hand, I also apprehend that, for domestic reasons during an electoral year, numerous Democrats will be less interested in monitoring the situation in Iraq than I am and their intervention could have an adverse effect on what progress might be achieved before, say, the months of August or September.
I voted "no" to your question because, in my opinion, an affirmative answer does require a timeline. The length of this timeline would depend on some very closely monitored conditions for troop removal. Every day, every week, the evidence in support of a continued presence of US-UK troops should consist, among other things, of a genuine buildup and growing involvement of Iraqi military forces. In other words, western troops should become not more but less obvious in the media, as casualties and as combatants. The rationale for a continued military presence should also be viewed less in military terms but increasingly in economic and social terms. If these trends are not noticeable in the months ahead, then I would tend to support the current Democratic initiatives. On the other hand, I also apprehend that, for domestic reasons during an electoral year, numerous Democrats will be less interested in monitoring the situation in Iraq than I am and their intervention could have an adverse effect on what progress might be achieved before, say, the months of August or September.
BethWagner
New member
I'm not denying the fact that things in Iraq aren't what they should be or could be. However, that doesn't mean we simply give up and come home, defeated. Did you expect the Taliban to immediatly surrender once we invaded? These extremists are willing to die for what they believe, and what's more there's thousands of them. We simply cannot expect everything to be as good as we'd hope.
Concerning WMD, just because we haven't found them doesn't mean they once existed. That is a foolish conclusion. They were there, and were removed. Saddam was bent on the destruction of the US and so were his followers. Personally, I believe we should fight the war on foriegn soil instead of bringing home here.
Saddam Hussien was bent on destroying the US. His followers still are. Anyone who denies that is believing exactly what the terrorists want them to believe.
We can't expect to sit at home and do nothing in the world. If we do, I'm afraid that we will find Iran overunning us. Their leaders are evil and their main mission is the destruction of Israel and the US.
Does "not imposing our lifestyle on others" mean that we should not spread freedom to every single person in this world that we can? Must we ignore the nations steeped in poverty and dictaitorship?
I am not seeking to cause a quarrel, only it has puzzled me for many years now how people can seem so blinded to reality.
Bill
Concerning WMD, just because we haven't found them doesn't mean they once existed. That is a foolish conclusion. They were there, and were removed. Saddam was bent on the destruction of the US and so were his followers. Personally, I believe we should fight the war on foriegn soil instead of bringing home here.
Saddam Hussien was bent on destroying the US. His followers still are. Anyone who denies that is believing exactly what the terrorists want them to believe.
We can't expect to sit at home and do nothing in the world. If we do, I'm afraid that we will find Iran overunning us. Their leaders are evil and their main mission is the destruction of Israel and the US.
Does "not imposing our lifestyle on others" mean that we should not spread freedom to every single person in this world that we can? Must we ignore the nations steeped in poverty and dictaitorship?
I am not seeking to cause a quarrel, only it has puzzled me for many years now how people can seem so blinded to reality.
Bill
Stronghold
New member
Hi Bill welcome to the forum first off I want to say I love mr.Bush and pray for him quit often I dont agree with his politics are the republician party for that matter but lets put all that aside for a minuite.
Bush at his core I believe is a kind man with a huge hart with a vary full plate I think your right abought the mass media I blame theem for being completly iresponsibal in reporting distorted facts on all accounts domestic and over seas with all of their tabloyd reporting I do not watch the news at all anymore its like watching Jerry Springer 24/7 with no balance and one liner banners to sell their hype.
But with that being said we are in a serious crissis domestically and abroad I care for everyone on the planet like I said before I dont have enough imformation to make an educated guess for a solution to thees problems but im thinking if are best in washington are strugling for the correct awnserws are direction the complication of the problems are only compounded ten fold by are inability to put politics aside to get to the core of the solutions instead of everyone undermining eachother.
There is no I in team....... but I will say I am proud of you for sticking up for a friend in need vary rare to find a friend like you thees days.
Last edited:
Stronghold
New member
Here is a statment I made recently that im not proud of but keep in mind it was said out of pure frustration for the direction this country is headed for.
Quote; Bush is history hopfully impeached soon are we ready for a woman presedent ? :end quote
But out of his intire presendency that is the only thing I have ever said abought him so I have backed him for along time and at heart I still do because I retract that stament actually at my core I hope he and the rest of are great partys can work together colectivly and and repair the damage and make the world a better place and learn from thees lessons hopfully without loss of life.
Take care Bill.
Quote; Bush is history hopfully impeached soon are we ready for a woman presedent ? :end quote
But out of his intire presendency that is the only thing I have ever said abought him so I have backed him for along time and at heart I still do because I retract that stament actually at my core I hope he and the rest of are great partys can work together colectivly and and repair the damage and make the world a better place and learn from thees lessons hopfully without loss of life.
Take care Bill.
Last edited:
BethWagner
New member
I am much obliged for your kind comments, Stronghold, I agree that people supporting the president are extremely rare but I'm proud to say I'm one of them. I always hope to be open minded as possible, however, and not blindly believe in everything he does because I agree with him on general issues.
We need more people who, as you said, will put away politics and get to solutions. I don't have much patience for people who critisize and do nothing about it.
Bill
We need more people who, as you said, will put away politics and get to solutions. I don't have much patience for people who critisize and do nothing about it.
Bill
Interesting observation ... and there seems to be lots of factual evidence supporting this view. I had not thought of this in this particular manner - it really strikes a different chord from my earlier mindset and certainly broadens my thoughts on the subject.
I also see the media being rather biased towards all the destruction and bad things happening abroad. Everyday, in our local paper on page A2 is another pic of people being blown to bits ... it's tiring to say the least. I do know good things are also happening, but we seldom are presented the opportunity to hear or see anything about those. One poster used the phrase of being spoon fed our information - certainly true - most all the information we receive is so very carefully orchestrated so that there is lots of rebellion amongst the world population. Where is the good news?
I too seldom, if ever, watch the TV news ... it is so full of gloom and doom ... even the weather reports suck
:grin: !!Thanks to all who have contributed to this discussion. I look forward to this continuing forward.
Kh
Sybarite
New member
The Taliban were not in Iraq. The Taliban were in Afghanistan.
Nobody is suggesting that they did not, at some point, exist. After all, we know that the US, the UK and others helped Saddam to build them.
Really? That'll be his old friend the US that armed him and helped him in other ways, will it? And I repeat: there was no link between Saddam and Bin Laden/al-Queada – in fact, they hated each other. The US and the UK-led coalition has opened the door to extremism by its illegal war. We have done Bin Laden's job for him.
We cannot go around invading soverign nations because we just don't happen to like them, and then attempting to impose our way of life/culture/values on them. Never mind being ethically dodgy, it isn't going to work – as an awful lot of history shows.
And perhaps if Messers Bush and Blair were actually concerned about the people, they'd have gone and 'liberated' the peoples of North Korea and Zimbabwe first before invading a relatively stable country.
"Reality" being the lessons of history?
Iran is an absolutely perfect case in point. The meddling of the US, the UK and others has helped to create exactly the situation that is of such concern today.
Last edited:
Andrew Roussak
New member
Hi dear MMIF-members, sorry that I'm meddling into your internal Commonwealth's discussion - I hope two words from the non-english-speaking part of the world will not spoil your party.
I don't want to discuss one more time here whether WMD and Al Qaeda-linked individuals have been there in Iraq before the invasion or not. I just want to answer the question as it was originally posted by Krummhorn here - should the troops be now pulled from Iraq?
So, on my opinion - NO, by now means in the nearest future anyway. I still remember what has happened in the Chechen Republic in Russia after Russia had lost the 1st Chechen war ( 1995 ) and the troops were pulled out. You all know what the Taliban regime in Afghanistan was before the US invasion - the nest of the international terrorism, the legal human slavery and the legal drug business. I don't believe Iraq can hope for any better future if the coalition forces go. The 1st Chechen War was maybe a mistake of Yeltzin - the 2nd one was a necessity. The US operation in 2002 against Taliban had a worldwide support and was a necessity as well - so if the coalition go now then it must sooner or later ( I guess- sooner... ) be back again. So, the troops must stay there where they are.
Another side of a problem - I'm amazed almost nobody of you had mentioned it. The US, UK and NATO troops are the real men and women, the real officers and soldiers, maybe the neighbours of yours, who are daily risking ( and losing ) their lives there - for what? As I believe, not only to help Iraqis ( Afghanis ) to built their future, but for the safety of all of us as well. The presence of the coalition forces in Iraq prevents the bad guys of gathering together for doing their bad job - let me mention one more time that the horror of 11.09.2001 had happened, as there was not a single western soldier in Iraq and the Taliban was in its full power in Afghanistan - the US did not begin this war anyway. So, as long as the troops have the courage and patience to stay and the Goverments to keep them there at the Middle East - I would say hats off and God may bless them.
best regards from Germany
Andrew Roussak
PS As I believe many of you still have an interest not only to politics but to music - I would like to invite you to visit my posts in the REVIEW forums - I posted there 3 pieces of mine - still have no comments except one of Krummhorn. Thanks in advance , good luck
Andrew
I don't want to discuss one more time here whether WMD and Al Qaeda-linked individuals have been there in Iraq before the invasion or not. I just want to answer the question as it was originally posted by Krummhorn here - should the troops be now pulled from Iraq?
So, on my opinion - NO, by now means in the nearest future anyway. I still remember what has happened in the Chechen Republic in Russia after Russia had lost the 1st Chechen war ( 1995 ) and the troops were pulled out. You all know what the Taliban regime in Afghanistan was before the US invasion - the nest of the international terrorism, the legal human slavery and the legal drug business. I don't believe Iraq can hope for any better future if the coalition forces go. The 1st Chechen War was maybe a mistake of Yeltzin - the 2nd one was a necessity. The US operation in 2002 against Taliban had a worldwide support and was a necessity as well - so if the coalition go now then it must sooner or later ( I guess- sooner... ) be back again. So, the troops must stay there where they are.
Another side of a problem - I'm amazed almost nobody of you had mentioned it. The US, UK and NATO troops are the real men and women, the real officers and soldiers, maybe the neighbours of yours, who are daily risking ( and losing ) their lives there - for what? As I believe, not only to help Iraqis ( Afghanis ) to built their future, but for the safety of all of us as well. The presence of the coalition forces in Iraq prevents the bad guys of gathering together for doing their bad job - let me mention one more time that the horror of 11.09.2001 had happened, as there was not a single western soldier in Iraq and the Taliban was in its full power in Afghanistan - the US did not begin this war anyway. So, as long as the troops have the courage and patience to stay and the Goverments to keep them there at the Middle East - I would say hats off and God may bless them.
best regards from Germany
Andrew Roussak
PS As I believe many of you still have an interest not only to politics but to music - I would like to invite you to visit my posts in the REVIEW forums - I posted there 3 pieces of mine - still have no comments except one of Krummhorn. Thanks in advance , good luck
Andrew
Sybarite
New member
Thanks for that, Andrew. You've just reminded me that Afghanistan is yet another example where, over many, many years, various nations have tried to interfere and control the place, but all have failed.
And it's possibly also worth reminding people that the Taliban emerged from the Mujahadean – those nice anti-Soviets that were fighting the Red Army (example of interference in the country) and were funded, armed and trained by the US, UK etc etc.
And it's possibly also worth reminding people that the Taliban emerged from the Mujahadean – those nice anti-Soviets that were fighting the Red Army (example of interference in the country) and were funded, armed and trained by the US, UK etc etc.