What Are We Doing In Iraq?

(Originally posted on e-thepeople)
I believe our troops need to come home. I don't want to throw stones at our conservative friends who believe are troops need to be there to make their dream come true. It's a good dream. A dream of a free Iraq with honest and fair elections where all have a fair chance according to their willing to work, etc. etc. etc. It is a good dream, but it isn't going to come true by military action, by the use of our troops or intervention. We are simply targets. I don't think we need to be a target anymore. We had this same dream for Vietnam, and we lost. It was based on our own economic benefit, and we lost. I see it happening again. We send in more troops, and more troops, and more troops. Unable to tell who the enemy is, we only end up harming the very ones we are fighting for.

I say lets stop this now. GET OUR TROOPS HOME.

In the past I argued with Tony Tiger about how long our troops would stay in Iraq, he was right. But I don't want to be wrong. Lets get our troops HOME.

Roger: The OkcityKid

" It is a good dream, but it isn't going to come true by military action, by the use of our troops or intervention."
It worked for Germany and Japan after WW2, there was prolonged US intervention in both countries.

" I don't think we need to be a target anymore. We had this same dream for Vietnam, and we lost."
In Vietnam the US waged war against a country who's ruler would have been democratically elected had he had the chance. Much like Tito in Yugoslavia, the communists of the Vietnam were very popular with the local people.

It is too late to go home. The decision to go to war in Irak was rash, irresponsible ala a classic XIXnth century military adventure. However, now that the troops are in there, there is no question of backing out now! If the US didn't want war, it should have avoided war. Now, the US must stay, make sure the region becomes stable and democratic.
Irak is hurting, you should have seen that coming, but now is not the time to backout and let the Irakis be taken over my some despotic fundamentalist/nationalist.
No backing out now, you either get the job done right or don't try at all.

Ya It is a good dream but whose dream is it? Their cultural hertiage is different from ours. Why do you think that given the oppurtunity to exercise their own free will, they would ever decide to live like you do?
It is a great falacy that we seek to impose our values upon their societies then wonder what went wrong when they don't accept our ways. Why should they, they are different and will form different perceptions of Self Rule, which they need to form and can not be forced upon them. In truth the only thing we do is to force our capitalism, not democracy upon them.

(A reply from e-thepeople)posted 12/01, by Runner5150
Because Vietnam and Iraq were never ABOUT 'winning'

Ask the guys who went to Nam, and they'll tell you. "WE got the order to take the hill, then we got ordered to pull back." "Repeat ad-nauseum."

Ask the guys who were being killed by sniper fire, that was coming from a Shell Oil Corporation Refinery, who were ordered to 'stand down', every single time. You might get an idea why we were 'really' in Veitnam in the first place.

Meanwhile, the 'media' reports our losses, pumps up the 'patriotic' spirit, and sells the people of these United States on the 'dream' that we are there for the purpose of "democracy".

And until enough people got tired of being lied to and stood up against the 'insanity' of it all that's where we stood.

Then "those" individuals swung to the other extreme and 'spit' on the guys who came back from Nam, calling them baby killers, and worse, because the poor smucks bought into the 'lie' of the patriotic duty, or worse got 'drafted and forced into slave labor doing some other man's killing for him.

We the people of the United States have bought the lie of Democracy, when that's not what this country is really all about anymore. It's about the military / industrial complex that actually RULES.

Bush isn't the first President to buy his son an election. (In my opinion George Sr. had to buy it cause George W. is too illiterate to be able to 'keep and maintain' gainful employment without "Daddy's help".)

Now, we are sending men and women, to DIE in Iraq for the same purposes of increasing the profits for a select few individuals in this country, decrease the population in order to 'adjust' the unemployment statistics, and sell the people of these 'United' States the illusion that they actually have some say in the process of running their own country.

I feel sorry for those of you that BUY into the lie. I live here, native to these lands from my ancestors, and I have to laugh at those that work so hard in order to support the illusion.

Your time would be better spent instead of getting on with your lives.

It was possible, at one time in this country, to stand up against the 'machine'. No longer is that true. My voice will be ignored because I'm a no one, a non-entity who carries no 'weight' where it matters. And I'm okay with that today.

I can have an opinion, relate the factual evidence, and no one in their 'right' minds will listen to me.

Imagine this though, my satisfaction will one day come from being able to, somewhere along the road, say those oh so satisfying words ... "I told you so!"

Zonker Harris for President

We can't just go there, kill a bunch of people and leave. We go to at least stick around a little bit so they will know what all the mess was about. But I think our stay is over. Time to hand it over to the Arabs.

"It is a great falacy that we seek to impose our values upon their societies then wonder what went wrong when they don't accept our ways. Why should they, they are different and will form different perceptions of Self Rule, which they need to form and can not be forced upon them. In truth the only thing we do is to force our capitalism, not democracy upon them."
It worked in both Japan and Germany. Germany had not had a real history of democracy and Japan had been under a monarchy for 1000 years!

"We can't just go there, kill a bunch of people and leave. We go to at least stick around a little bit so they will know what all the mess was about. But I think our stay is over. Time to hand it over to the Arabs."
Well looks like we agree, except perhaps timing, but on the whole we agree

DumbTeen, not that I am in disagrement with you but to point out distinctions. We were aided by the French in our revolt with the English monarchy. But . . . 1) Before our revolution, they fought against (us) the engilsh for this land. 2) Our actions didn't happen in a vacunm . . . Although separate from Europe, the growing resentment for individual rights & freedoms were fed by the influx of Europeans migrating into the colonies. 3) France & England formed democratic governments as well as the US. Baut their form is different from ours because they were formed suited to their people culture & social values. I disagree with OKcity about Nam in that 'we were not helping others seeking freedom but seeking to force our values upon others. Just as there is a difference between our war with France as an English Colony and France aiding us in establishing our independence from England.
As OKcity stated our governing body likes to put robes of righteousness over their actions to 'use a robe as a cloak'.
If you have something good to give to others would you try to force it upon them? It should never had happen to begin with, we hsould have taken No as the answer and moderated the use of our own oil supplies. But the gluttony of wealth desirers their oil, so we lie, decieve and justify our actions to obtain unobstructed use over their oil supplies.

The people who don't want democracy, as it was in nazy germany, was the people with the guns. It was Hitler with his paramilitary Stormtroopers and to a lesser extent the German army.
It should be the same in Irak. And if people don't want democracy, they are free to elect a dictator that will remove their freedoms.
Regardless of the foul motives of the war, thousands of Irakis were dying because of the trade embargo. The motives were false and selfish but the US cannot allow Irak to go wrong, that's why less Irakis are dying today.

What is so right with this Nation that we have the right to impose our will upon others? Is there some fundalmentist belief that the US is Lord of this world and therefore everyone should do as we will for them to do?
Germany and Japan was waring with those who opposed such actions, we entered into a Wolrd War (of domination)
Did those who died fighting against Glorious Despots do so that we should become such despots?

I do not contest Bush's foul motives.
However, Saddam was a dictator, we are installing a democracy. We are now offering the Irakis a choice, if they want a socialist despot (Saddam) they can have it, if they want a fundamentalist, so be it.
This is democracy, despote foul motives, the US is attempting to stop armed minorites from ruling the country. YES, the US is the armed minority ruling the country right now, but the US has promised to install a democratic government and I see no reason why they would lie.

Will they really get a democractic society, then I think we should at least get that much ourselves!

Very valid. Its true the US could be more democratic. Ultimately, the US is 'democratic enough", it could be more, and should be more (by making sure Bush's election can't happen the way it did + stopping corporate funding of election campaigns).
Despite these, the US IS democratic, IE, Bush can't fuckup too much or the democrats get elected.
Its not like the people don't have a say in US politics.

I'm afraid to shout to loud in any direction on this subject (even though I do). We the people never really knew what was going on in Vietnam. Still it is hard to find the truth about it. Not that the media intentionally deceive us, but the advertisers pay for sensationalism. So we hear about the fighting, killing, riots.

But this I do agree on and will make a BIG deal of it when our troops are out of there. You take an oath to protect the constitution (and follow the orders of the president. errrrr). That needs to be better defined. After Desert Storm such legislation was presented on this subject and was shot down, but it needs to be reintroduced. We are not the world police, this was never meant to be, can't be, shouldn't even try.

OK- Having been in the Corp, we were the private army of the President, the army, navy and air force could only be brought in if Congress declared War, not the president. Which is why the Marines fought police actions in Nam, etc.
teen - I gave some thought about voting, what would it be like if everyone actually voted on government actions? To make an informed decision, we would have to watch presentations of facts, etc instead of movie and shows, we probably would have to spend all free time to preform the neccessary functions of federal, state, county and local government.
The good news we can delegate our authority to elected officials, the bad news we have no contract that they will in fact act to our benefit. The reason prople band together in organizations is not so much to present a unified voting block as to pool resources to buy political influence. which means that corporations and the wealthy exercise greater control than the people, I wouldn't define that as democracy but capitalism.