I have lost all faith on the governemnt!

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Desert Heat

New member
How many deaths will it take for the US to take a new approach? Why are we fighting this war? The troops are told it is to free the people of Iraq. Well, I don't know about any of you out there, but I don't give a damn about the people of Iraq and if they are free or not. Do you really think they care if we are free? First it was WMD, then terrorism, now for freedom. They sould more like excuses rather than reasons. My friends and family are out there dieing. I don't see W sending his daughters there or anyone else he holds dear, it is our loved ones who are taking the brunt and they don't even know why. I am just tired of excuses and hearing terms like "cut and run". We left Nam in ruins and I wouln't feel the slightest bit bad if we left that country in ruins. We have spent billions of our dollars that could have went to fighting a real enemy, like Iran or N Korea, countries that actually pose a threat to us.

The soldiers who do their job well end up in Camp Pendelton awaiting the death sentence. That is not right and sends out the wrong message to all soldiers and Marines. If you do what you are supposed to do, you will be put to death by your own country.


Sorry about the spelling and typing, but I was a little mad when I wrote this!
 
Blaming Clinton isn't going to help. This has gotten really bad and people are dieing and this war wasn't going on during his watch. I don't care about what parties people belong to, I don't care about what people say, I don't care about acts and policies that have been written. All I care about is that our loved ones are dieing for no good reason and I want them out!

I don't care about liberating the Iraqi people!!

Also, that was then 1998. It isn't 1998 anymore and we know a lot more now and we have already dismissed 2 out of the 3. Times change and we get more information.
 
If you read the Iraqi Liberation Act, passed by a unanamous Senate and signed by Bill Clinton, it has been about all three, freedom, WMD, and terrorism, since 1998.
Click to expand...

With the emphasis on terrorism, but another important aspect of the Iraqi war is the absolute necessity of creating democratic governments in the Middle East in order to bring some stability there, and by default, to the rest of the world.

It's easy to criticize the US involvement in Iraq if you are limited in your perspective. However, not just the US, but the world, is at a crossroads where we can either slip into chaos and WWIII, or get things under control and have some kind of world balance again (I say "balance" because the entire world has NEVER been at "peace", so balance without major continental conflicts is as good as it gets).

Look at the big picture, and I mean the REALLY big picture, and it all starts to make sense.

Carter
 
You can say it is a world agenda, but the rest of the world doesn't want us there. Iraq doesn't want us there, doesn't that matter? Who are we to pick and choose what countries are to be totally taken over by the US and then change their govenment to suit our needs. I have to admit that the stability stance is not a good one. I don't know about you, but that region doesn't look too stable to me, and that is after we took over and planted the democratic government. If you want to argue that installing a democratic goverment in the middle east makes a country more stable, then you must be bilnd because before we got their it was plent stable, and now it is a CIVIL WAR.

Also, we pick out the one country we thought we could easily defeat and get a handle on that region. What we didn't think was going to happen was people from all over that region, from all the surrounding countries, come in and use this war as a holly war and an excuse to fight invaders.
 
You can say it is a world agenda, but the rest of the world doesn't want us there. Iraq doesn't want us there, doesn't that matter?
Click to expand...

http://www.voanews.com/english/2006-09-25-voa5.cfm
Iraqi President Jalal Talabani says he wants U.S. forces to remain in Iraq for a long time to prevent what he describes as "foreign interference" in the country.

Mr. Talabani tells the Washington Post newspaper that he would like the U.S. to keep at least two air bases and 10,000 troops in Iraq in the long term. There are currently 147,000 U.S. troops in Iraq.
Click to expand...
 
DH
CDH explained it pretty clearly about the big picture and what it is really about. One of the problems with being able to see the big picture is that there doesn't seem to be a cut and dried objective. In past wars we had a simple objective: prevent the enemy from achieving his objective. We had to stop the Japanese from conquering the US, we had to stop Germany (twice) from conquering Europe. We tried to stop North Vietnam from conquering South Vietnam. (oops). The same with Korea. In the Civil war one side's objective was the abolishment of slavery, the other side's was to maintain it. Each side had the objective of preventing the other side from achieving theirs. We don't seem to have a clear objective in the Middle East because our enemy doesn't have an objective. They are not trying to gain riches, or territory. They are trying to kill as many people and create as much fear and terror worldwide as they possibly can for one simple reason. They enjoy it! How do you devise a battle plan against that?
 
Iraqi President Jalal Talabani says he wants U.S. forces to remain in Iraq for a long time to prevent what he describes as "foreign interference" in the country.

Mr. Talabani tells the Washington Post newspaper that he would like the U.S. to keep at least two air bases and 10,000 troops in Iraq in the long term. There are currently 147,000 U.S. troops in Iraq.
Click to expand...


The president of Iraq will say anything to make sure he has the support of the US. Without us, he will be overthrown in an instant and probably killed. He needs us a lot more than we need him, and for what?

This big picture of stability is not a real possibility. We had soldiers in Suadi Arabia and because of that we all know what happened. Now, if we do occupy the bases that we are currnetly building, then it will be under constant attack or the US will be attacked because of the bases. Saudi Arabia was happy to have us there and the troops were treated well, but certain people didn't want us in their so called "holly land" and history takes it from there.
 
I dont know about the "holly" land, but no one really cares about the argument you are making because its made strictly from emotion and quite frankly isn't feasible or practical.
 
Iraqi President Jalal Talabani says he wants U.S. forces to remain in Iraq for a long time to prevent what he describes as "being shot to death as a collaborating traitor by Sunni insurgents or Al-Qaeda in Iraq types."
Click to expand...

There...fixed it for you.
 
How so. The reason Usama started his fight agains the US is because US soldiers were in Saudi Arabia and that is not emotion, that is fact.

Yes, I am emotional about this issue, but if you lost people who are dear to you, then you'd know where I was coming from. I don't know, you may have. For all I know you could be the most decorated soldier on earth, but I know how I feel and I say what I think. If you don't like, too bad, we all have our little quirks, and I am not alone on this issue.

You know a lot of the things I am stating are facts. If you would like to engage in an intellegent conversation, and can mind my awful spelling, lets talk. What do you think about this issue?
 
The US has been bumbling around over there for decades.The artificially created countries and annexation of Isreal are sore spots with a long history.The reason we try to keep a stable pro-western government in power is OIL.Anybody who says we would be over there if the oil was not there is delusional,running for office ,or both.I am not saying that the motive is incorrect.If you want to go back to the days of the horse and buggy,or see a depression that would make the 30's look like a walk in the park,have the oil supply stopped.Forget the religious,cultural nonsense.Oil is our way of life.I can't understand why it is so politically incorrect to say we are fighting for it.Oh,and don't give me that crap about the big oil tycoons.The average man will be hurt by an oil shortage long before the rich.
 
Just for the record I have lost a friend, and I have others that are either over there or on their way.

As for what should be done, I agree that there was a lack of proper planning as far as policing the nation. I think this was largely in part due to us winning the "war" quicker than anyone, even the optimists, had thought. You do remember the predictions of doom and gloom from the liberals and peaceniks?

So while we should have done things different and been more fluid in our strategy, us being there is a must. Pulling out will make every death be in vail and will open up a vast expanse for iran and other fundamentalists to gain power. At the very least, we are americans, and we finish things we start.
 
I completely understand that we need to finish what we start, but at what cost? When will the death toll rise to the point when we say, ok enough, lets just bomb it into the groung and start over. I don't know about you, but I really don't see the end anytime soon.

I guess the reason why we are there doesn't really matter because we are there for whatever reason, and we are not leaving anytime soon. The fact is, we are there for the long haul whether I like it or not, but we need to drastically change things if we don't want this to turn into another Nam. We need to get some real leaders who can actually unite this country and take the war in the right direction becuase it is making no progress, only regress, and that is hard to argue.

There are things that I don't agree with, like why we are there, but we are there, and why stay on the track that has lead us tho where we are now, when some change might do something, anything. I guess I am just tired of turning on the news and looking at the list names, praying that my loved ones are not on that list.


We can choose to agree to disagree that we need to be there or not, but we can put our heads togehter to figure out a something that can help.
 
Losing faith in the government.

First of all. I don't worrship at the altar of "Man". I cannot lose faith in what I have never had faith in. Men are never going to stop trying to impose thier will upon other men. Might makes right is never the way solve the problems of the world.

The US is in Iraq more than likely for a strategic reason, as well as Afghanistan. Iran being between these countries. Iran and Iraq both were and are dangerous to the stability of the region. Once we secure Iraq and Afghanistan, we will set sights on Iran. I personally believe this forcing of our wills on the middle east is only because we are dependant upon oil. Energy independence at home it the key to our survival. Oil money finances the terrorists, if we would have never shown them where and how to drill oil , this would not be a problem. Best way to stop this is to stop buying and start mining it here in the US. 1.2 Billion Muslims can't be beaten by conventional means.

The US armed forces are a axe , not a fly swatter. Hit and run tactics require the operations to be special. Soldiers are not police. We came at this war the wrong way and are paying for it now.

Just a little comparison. 3000 or so servicemen are dead now, after a few years. 16 teenagers per day are killed in automobiles . That is more than 5000 per year. I hear no outcry for a ban on teens driving cars. What I am saying is... the war is not going as bad as the lib press wants folks to believe. Keep faith in your Creator where it is better served.

Yes , it is a shame that young men are dying for unclear reasoning, they did sign up for it.
 
DH, you're feeling the same emotions that people have felt since the first clan of cave-men went to war with their neighbors. They're the same emotions your great-great-grandchildren will feel when someone they love dies in a war.
I've said it before and I'm saying again: War is as neccesary to mankind as sex. All forms of life, from the lowest forms of algae to humans, engage in some sort of war to survive. In every one of those conflicts, be it on a distant battlefield or in your sink-drain, some die so others can live. Death is a fact of life. Whether the survivors see any short-term benefit from the loss of life is entirely inconsequential except in a society ruled by reaction. In recent years, television has brought war into living rooms in all its bloody glory. The reaction of those who had heretofor been insulated from it has been a muted form of the horror felt by those directly involved. In a reflexive effort to erase that horror from our lives we cry out for an end to it and in some cases, such as Viet Nam, we force an end - to that particular war. But it crops up again and again, as it always will.
Rulers, whether they're ours or someone elses, find 'excuses' for war and paint them as 'reasons' so they can send others to fight and die. In fact, the only true 'reason' for war is the eventual survival of the species. That individuals within the species are sacrificed is, in the long run, of no importance.
I believe it was Plato who said, "Only the dead have seen the end of war."
I'm sorry for your loss, but damning Bush or Clinton or Osama or whoever is tantamount to killing the messenger.
 
What I am saying is... the war is not going as bad as the lib press wants folks to believe.
Click to expand...


You say the war is not a big deal because of only 3000 troops are dead. What about the billions of dollars that is has cost? That money has come out of all our pockets that could have gone into education, etc.... What about the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people dead, men, women, children. The country is totally destroyed and in the midst of a civil war and you say it is not a big deal. Hmmmmmm
 
I have not lost anyone dear to me in this or any other conflict so I can not pretend to know, or even imagine, how you feel, except that I would probably be quite angry. I think I would be even more angry though if after my loved one was killed my government said "oh, the heck with it, let's go home". I would hope that I could take some comfort in the knowledge that his or her participation had contributed to some greater good. When we look back at Viet Nam we say "what the hell good did that do". If we leave Iraq now we will be asking the same qustion of this conflict years from now. Unfortunately we are now, from a strategy standpoint, at the "Now What?" stage of the conflict.
 
I like that appraoch, but this war is about the government and not the people. I don't see how you could take comfort dieing for the governement in any circumstance. Don't forget that the government tells the troops they are fighting to free the Iraqi people, either you can think that is worth fighting for, or maybe have the government rise up and take control and show some real leadership. Just a thought if they want the troops to continue to fight with vengence and not loose hope.

I would respect the government more if they just said we are here for oil, strtegic location, etc....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top