This one ought to have some good debating going on. As we all know United States forces as well as others are in Iraq fighting the war on terror. Barrack Obama will pull the troops out in his presidency. I ask you should they stay in Iraq or be pulled out?
bring them home, believe me, nobody who says "my nation is fighting on terror and i support it" has a member of his family involved with war. The equation is simple: you want war? You are an idiot. So, millions of war-supporters? Millions of idiots.
bring them home, believe me, nobody who says "my nation is fighting on terror and i support it" has a member of his family involved with war. The equation is simple: you want war? You are an idiot. So, millions of war-supporters? Millions of idiots.
I support this war, but i don't want it there is a difference. Also maybe becasue your nation only likes war when your saving your own asses?and you want other people to do it for you. You didn't lose two of your greatest bulidings and thousands of lives to terrorists. You DON'T know what it's like.
Being from the UK, I'm not sure if this affects me as much as it does Americans. But I think that if we pull all of the troops out of Iraq, there will be consequences. For example, as soon as we pull out the troops, there will be no control, and it will give the terrorists a chance to regroup and try to form some kind of system.
That is actually one of the main arguments of many UK politicians. That if we leave the training camps will return and we will face more terrorists on the streets of the UK. However the money and lives spent on being in Iraq is very high so it depends if you belive the long erm benefits outweigh these costs. Arguably the more brutal a regime the more stable a country is and pulling the rug under from Saddam has completely destabilised Iraq with widespread violence. My brother who is currently out in Afghanistan but has served a tour in Iraq, speaking to the locals found out that best friends living 5 mins walk away from each other havent seen each other in years because its so dangerous to leave thier homes. In these circumstances it seems very harsh to leave.
So what? Somone who supports the war, is a warmonger?
Thats is straight untrue! Infact you do know, that no matter how much, people beg for there to be no wars, there WILL ALWAYS be war. It's in a humans bloodline, wars have been fought in since the beggining of time. From wooden clubs to knight armor to muskets, and then from there to guns....War is apart of this planet, as much as you or the next guy.
Sometimes wars are fought for freedom..(WW2) Say the allies never did a thing, and Hitler was rampet on his "Cleansing", would you think that he would get tierd and just apologize? No, sometimes war is the only option left. There are amny cases where wars do not need to be fought, but there are just as many, where that may and is the best soulution.
Also maybe becasue your nation only likes war when your saving your own asses?
Yeah, the only wars should be defensive wars.
So what? Somone who supports the war, is a warmonger?
Someone who supports an unjust war (like Iraq) is a warmongerer.
For example, as soon as we pull out the troops, there will be no control, and it will give the terrorists a chance to regroup and try to form some kind of system.
If the US and UK didn't stick their noses in the Middle-East in the first place, we wouldn't have to worry about this. Maybe if we did the right thing (pull out of Afghanistan, and Iraq, and cut off Israel) we wouldn't have to worry about terrorists plotting against the Western World.
If the US and UK didn't stick their noses in the Middle-East in the first place, we wouldn't have to worry about this. Maybe if we did the right thing (pull out of Afghanistan, and Iraq, and cut off Israel) we wouldn't have to worry about terrorists plotting against the Western World.
It is too late now though. The US has been backing Isrel sinced the 50s so there would still be lots of opposition. The UK however not so much, but the first gulf war pretty much sent us down that road.
It is too late now though. The US has been backing Isrel sinced the 50s so there would still be lots of opposition. The UK however not so much, but the first gulf war pretty much sent us down that road.
It's not too late for a change. The best of allies have become enemies and the worst enemies have become best allies in a matter of decades. France and Britain were mortal enemies. They almost went to war in the 1890's, yet fought side-by-side in 1914. I'm not saying we need to become enemies with Israel. But our undying support for them needs to stop.
Troops in Iraq ? American soldiers fighting on terrorism? dont be funny they just want the natural sources of Iraq... USA have 897(at least) military base on the world they need money they need sources they need bla bla bla... So i dont belive U.S is fighting for Iraq people...I'm also sorry for U.S.A soliders if they dont have to go Iraq they werent die and werent kill civilians...just think , one morning you get out of your home and foreign soliders take control of your city your sources your history... these are not good for both USA and Iraq...
It's not too late for a change. The best of allies have become enemies and the worst enemies have become best allies in a matter of decades. France and Britain were mortal enemies. They almost went to war in the 1890's, yet fought side-by-side in 1914. I'm not saying we need to become enemies with Israel. But our undying support for them needs to stop.
Britain and France united at first to protect their colonial interests in Africa from the Germans who were expanding their empire. It was not for love of each other. With the middle eastern nations simply pulling out would not stop the animosity between us and there would probably still be many people willing to commit terrorist acts against us. In addition the religious aspect of the conflict mean that many exremists would take us on regardless of if we are there or not because we are secular non muslim nations.
