I was for it and I am for it.

I myself grew up in a country liberated from fascism by the USA and a land occupied by US troops for almost 50 years. I will never forget what the US did for me, my family, and my country.

The majority of Iraqis think that the invasion was a good thing and an even larger majority (namely all Shiites) believe that the removal of Saddam from power was a good thing.

As despressing as they are, the American deaths don't compare to Iraqi deaths under Saddam and Iraqi deaths due to terrorist attacks that would only increase if the Americans withdrew. (Popular opinion holds that terrorist attacks are caused by occupation and would stop if the occupation ends, but reality has simply shown that not to be the case.)

Journalists reporting from Baghdad paint a bleak picture of Iraq and somehow many blame the US for the deeds of Sunni and Shia terrorists. But those few journalists that dared to visit the rest of the country paint a much brighter picture.

Outside a few parts of Baghdad Iraq is a fairly normal country and outside the Arab parts Iraq is also completely safe (there was not a single successful terror attack in the Kurdish region in all those years).

People in Iraq are happy that Abu Ghraib now stands for minor prisoner abuse as they remember that tens of thousands of Kurds and Shiites used to be executed in that very prison under Saddam.

Shiites have finally had a chance to mourn their hundreds of thousands of dead relatives when coalition troops found Saddam's mass graves.

Kurds have used the opportunity to rebuild what Saddam destroyed, and although their past is dark (as many museums in the Kurdish region show), their future is now bright; IF the US don't leave.

I can already see the positive outcome of the invasion, I only wish it would have happened earlier. Had it been done in 1990, hundreds of thousands of Shiites wouldn't have died in vain.

You see 3990 and think it is a lot. And it is.

But it does not even compare to the numbers generated under Saddam in Iraq and under other Arab nationalist rulers in other Arab countries.

The only fundamentally regrettable things about the invasion are that it didn't happen earlier and that it happened only in Iraq.

The people in Darfur would be HAPPY if violence in Sudan was at the Iraq level.

If you think 3990 American deaths, think how many people in Iraq didn't die because of their sacrifice. Life under Saddam was not easy, but death was. The regime holds a record even for the middle east with literally millions of deaths and perhaps the only systematic gasing of members of a specific ethnic group outside Germany.

 

On the lighter side:

A Kurdish businessman tried to get a McDonalds franchise and was rejected. He has since founded his own restaurant chain and calls it "McDonells". It's very popular in Iraq and he still wants his chain to become a part of McDonalds.

 

And for a historical perspective on reporting:

http://www.netneurotic.net/Extrablatt/

 

 

 

I love and appreciate our troops.  Get them out.  Thanks for the article, bro.

I love and appreciate American troops too.

If they had withdrawn from Germany within five years of the invasion, I would not love and appreciate them as much.

Without the invasion I would not exist. Without the occupation I would have grown up under communist rule. I love and appreciate American troops, especially since they have given me the opportunity to do so.

There were people in America who opposed America's entry into WW2. And there were people in America who opposed America's staying in Germany after WW2.

 

At least in America we had a real enemy. A country, a government, something tangible. Here, we had no right to go in, there were no weapons of mass destruction, Al Queada (can't spell, sorry) wasn't there, all the reasons we had for going in were erroneous.

This is why I say, GET THEM OUT. Let them come home and take care of their families. Next time we start a war, get some hardcore proof for the reasons.

(I assume you mean "in Germany".)

Saddam's government in Iraq was every bit as tangible as Hitler's government in Germany. In fact, they even shared an alliance with the "Palestininians" and their "cause".

America had every right to go in as Saddam violed a cease-fire agreement and shot at American and British aircraft. Where the WMDs went, nobody knows. But that Saddam did have them and never proved that he destroyed them was and is true.

Among the many reasons given for the invasion, WMDs were the most prominent because it was the only reason actually acceptable to the UN. Iraq's human rights record was another reason given by the Bush administration, and the mass graves uncovered after the invasion pretty much proved them right, didn't they?

Al Qaeda certainly do believe that the Iraq war has something to do with them. And it is amazing how much the Iraqis' opinions changed towards Al-Qaeda in recent years. Suddenly the US have an Arab ally against Al-Qaeda.

The fact that you ignore hardcore proof doesn't mean that there wasn't hardcore proof.

How do I know you are ignoring it? You didn't mention anything but the WMDs. Since you were trying to make the point that the reasons for the war turned out to be wrong, you should have mentioned two or three examples, not just one.

Kurdish fears of Baathism were and are real. Mass graves of Shiites in the south were real too. Iraq's violation of the cease-fire agreement was real, as was his support for "Palestinian" terrorists. The fact that you didn't mention those things tells me that you either didn't know about thesm or didn't consider them reasons (although the Bush administration did).

The fact is that the Iraqis want the US to stay and that, in the past, American withdrawals were not good for the country in question, America, or the world.

Why do you want Iraq to go through what Indochina went through? I understand American lives are valuable, but what about the responsibility towards allies (the Iraqi government, Israel, Turkey, Kuwait), promises (to the Shiites and Kurds in Iraq, already abandoned once), and
the war on terror (which is very much fought in Iraq today)?

Al-Qaeda are in Iraq and the Iraqis are fighting them for us (America and the western world). Why abandon them now that they have chosen sides?

If America had done that to Germany, rest assured the Soviet Union would have invaded, and ultimately the 1940s generation of people like you would have done to Germany (and western Europe) what you are now trying to do to Iraq (and the middle east).

Somebody has to do these things, if not America, who will?

 

haha, oops. I was typing fast. Yes, I meant Germany.




Is America the world's police force? If we send troops to Iraq, does that mean that we should also send them to Darfur, Colombia, and anywhere else with a rotten government or violence? Where is the line?