AGS Steam Games

Forums → WEPR → Troops in Iraq

51 10934
FutureUSMC
offline
FutureUSMC
270 posts
Nomad

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?

  • 51 Replies
Zootsuit_riot
offline
Zootsuit_riot
1,523 posts
Nomad

End terrorism?


Our strategies won't "end" terrorism. Where one sect falls, another will rise in it's place, whether it be in the Middle East, or in Japan, or even America itself.

Get rid of WMD's?


Proven that there weren't any. Even Bush admits that he was misinformed.

Form a new democracy?


Imperialism has been the downfall of many, many countries.

Make a new ally?


What? By forcing them to like us with guns and explosives? Definitely. In case you haven't noticed Samy, the world is very upset with the United States at the moment, mainly due to our wars in the Middle East.

Stop Iran for creating WMD's?


Iran and Pakistan wouldn't be threats to American safety if we hadn't pushed the Taliban into those countries after invading. They seek shelter there, and find it, because U.S. troops aren't allowed to cross the borders.

Do they not count?


No, they don't. The war in Iraq was started on a false premises, thus making it unjust and irrelevant. It's a waste of money and troops that should be spent on finding Osama bin Laden.
Fat_Justin
offline
Fat_Justin
20 posts
Nomad

This war in Iraq is just because of one stupid guy, and one stupid accident. Hopefully Barrack will patch it up.

samy
offline
samy
4,871 posts
Nomad

Our strategies won't "end" terrorism. Where one sect falls, another will rise in it's place, whether it be in the Middle East, or in Japan, or even America itself.


Then I'll rephrase it slow down and reduce terrorism.

Proven that there weren't any. Even Bush admits that he was misinformed.


Wrong we have found some just not as many or as strong as expected.

Imperialism has been the downfall of many, many countries.[/quote

If you ignore the fact that they have and run their own government i guess it could kind of be considered imperialism.

[quote]What? By forcing them to like us with guns and explosives? Definitely. In case you haven't noticed Samy, the world is very upset with the United States at the moment, mainly due to our wars in the Middle East.


Were not forcing them we didn't lay a hand on the iraqi people just on terrorist sects, and ya I've noticed it but dare i say i think most of the worlds wrong about this. I think history books will record this as an expensive but necisary and smart war.

Iran and Pakistan wouldn't be threats to American safety if we hadn't pushed the Taliban into those countries after invading. They seek shelter there, and find it, because U.S. troops aren't allowed to cross the borders.


Iran's president hates America and started a nuclear program, what does that have to do with the taliban.
ChopstickBoB
offline
ChopstickBoB
142 posts
Nomad

This debate continues from the 'shoe incident' thread....
[url]http://armorgames.com/community/thread/2537340/bush-dodges-shoe/page/4#post-2551023[/url] I've moved it here because Skyla and I got off topic.

The death of 1,000,000 Iraqis?

Yes. The war has killed 1,000,000 people. In a country of 29,267,000. 3.5% of the population.
[url]http://www.iraqbodycount.org/[/url]
this site puts it at 89,892 to 98,151

This article...
[url]http://www.weeklystandard.com/Utilities/printer_preview.asp?idArticle=3889[/url]
...from The Weekly Standard cites "Four months before Saddam's fall, Human Rights Watch estimated that up to 290,000 people had "disappeared" since the late 1970s and were presumed dead. The Coalition Provisional Authority's human rights office estimates that 300,000 bodies are contained in the numerous mass graves. "And that's the lower end of the estimates," said one CPA spokesperson. In fact, the accumulated credible reports make the likely number at least 400,000 to 450,000. So, by a conservative estimate, the regime was killing civilians at an average rate of at least 16,000 a year between 1979 and March 2003"

Saddam wins!

Al Zeidi's newspaper suggests another motivation, the death of a co-worker by unknown gunmen in September, 2007.

So he assumes it was an American gun that claimed his life? What about all of the foreign nationals that were drawn in by the American presence? Does he have any shoes for them?

The NY times that planted CIA articles about WMDs?

Because everyone knows the NY Times just loves the prez. Thats sarcasm. They could rename their editorial section "Hate Mail for Bush".

I haven't researched, but I'll go with your statement that 18,000 Iraqis were killed over Saddam's control

If you read my first post that was over three days. Women, children, and innocent men. All murdered because they were Kurds. Google Kurd Massacre and you'll see what I'm talking about.

Note that the reporter's life is in danger now. Al Zeidi's newpaper is pleading for him to be treated fairly. He was dropped to the ground and taken away, moaning. Then a trail of blood could clearly be seen on the carpet.

Well looking at this story...
[url=http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/12/17/shoe.thrower.iraq/]
from CNN there was no blood, but apparently he might have a broken arm and some ribs, though when the injuries occured can't be verified. And he will recieve a fair trial, on charges of assaulting a foreign head of state. His brother is afraid he will be murdered after he gets out of prison, which is purely supposition.

I'm saying that if the American government promised to make their lives better, why are they doing the things their pedecessors, who failed, would've done?

Like allowing the people to write a constitution? Or vote in an election with someone other that the current dictator on the ballet? Or have free media that openly criticizes their presence with no retaliation?

I think I covered everything you brought up there.
woody_7007
offline
woody_7007
2,662 posts
Peasant

@ Skyla from this thread
http://armorgames.com/community/thread/2537340/bush-dodges-shoe/page/4#post-2551083
as it was getting off topic and overlapping into this one.

but at least Iraq was a wealthy nation with a stable economy, economic classes and achievements


It seems you pretty much ignored my previous post. Saddam bankrupted Iraq with a devastating war with Iran. The economic classes in Iraq were extremely unequal with huge gaps between the rich and poor, like most arab nations. Not many achievements i can think of aside from nearly wiping out an ethnic group (the Kurds).

Executives were put there by the American government, they suck up to the United States. The candidates that the Iraqi population can vote are all willing to do what America wants. Hypothetically speaking, let's say Bush did bring peace to Iraq, at what cost? The death of 1,000,000 Iraqis?


The executives were elected by the Iraqi people, not the US government. Of course if it wasnt for the US they wouldnt be there, Saddam would, but the US actually has not got involved at all with Iraqi parliament as it wants Iraq to get used to democracy and not seem reliant on the US. 1000000 Iraqis is a hugely disproportionate number. Even if this number was true (and it's not) how many more innocents would have died under Saddam.

He was dropped to the ground and taken away, moaning. Then a trail of blood could clearly be seen on the carpet. Friends and family frantically tried calling their relative, but in vain, his phone was switched off. I think family and friends have the right to know what will happen to him. He should be given a fair trial. The station begged the government to "spare his life."


Of course he was injured, at the time the security presence didnt know what he threw, it could have been a bomb. He was taken down, the same thing would have happened if someone in the US had thrown something at the president. He will not be sentenced to death, that behaviour doesnt warrant the death penaly under Iraqi law.

Al Zeidi's newspaper suggests another motivation, the death of a co-worker by unknown gunmen in September, 2007.


Ahh yes unkown gunmen a psuedonym for Americans? I think not. Terrorist cells in Iraq do not repesent the US it is them he should hate if this is the case.

Really now? Didn't American troops do pretty much the same as what Saddam did? But over a shorter period of time, with more killings? I haven't researched, but I'll go with your statement that 18,000 Iraqis were killed over Saddam's control (July 16, 1979 â�" April 9, 2003.) Americans killed 60 times more Iraqis in only 5 years, compared to Saddam's 18,000 in 24 years.


That 18,000 are only the Kurds he killed with nerve gas in an attempted mini genocide here are statistics i gained form this website,
http://wais.stanford.edu/Iraq/iraq_deathsundersaddamhussein42503.html
truly harrowing figures
(direct quote from website) :Along with other human rights organizations, The Documental Centre for Human Rights in Iraq has compiled documentation on over 600,000 civilian executions in Iraq. Human Rights Watch reports that in one operation alone, the Anfal, Saddam killed 100,000 Kurdish Iraqis. Another 500,000 are estimated to have died in Saddam's needless war with Iran. Coldly taken as a daily average for the 24 years of Saddam's reign, these numbers give us a horrifying picture of between 70 and 125 civilian deaths per day for every one of Saddam's 8,000-odd days in power"

Even if the figure of 1 million you wrongly stated earlier was true it is dwarfed in scale by these numbers.

I'm saying that if the American government promised to make their lives better, why are they doing the things their pedecessors, who failed, would've done?


They are trying to make their lives better. They removed a brutal dictator, and when the anarchy began as a rsult they stayed and attemptd to stabilise it, what more can be done, if the US left today there would still be anarchy probably more deaths than before. In addition its not like US troops are killing these innocents personally it is terrorist cells in Iraq doing so.

As for the picture, these isolated incidents are no doubt horrible but do not represent the US involvement in Iraq.
eagleye762
offline
eagleye762
8 posts
Nomad

look we should stay in iraq because if we move out the iranians will try bombing us again and u know what there is a big stink about this but the troops should stay there they they chose to stay there so they could protect us

Showing 46-51 of 51