NationStates Jolt Archive

As many of you will know, the coalition in Iraq have caused much discontent, resulting in the tragic Madrid bombings and the murder of an Italian hostage. I was wondering what everyone's thoughts are on this. Also it would be interesting to know what the public of different countries think of the war. I am British, and I was for the war, but the Iraqi civilians aren't being paid much attention and aren't benefiting enough from the 'liberation,' and this has swung the balance. In Britain many people were opposed to the war, and in March last year, a record breaking protest of 2 million people occured in London.

errr… you want to post this in "General". Read the index page, :wink:

*kicks this thread to general*

i dont agree with any of your choices. We belong in iraq weather or not the UN likes it, Once we take it and get it stable it will return to a deplomatic type government and we wil pull out

i dont agree with any of your choices. We belong in iraq weather or not the UN likes it, Once we take it and get it stable it will return to a deplomatic type government and we wil pull out

yes with pushing 200 dead americans and 50 British troopers, yes really stable, :roll: they hate us plain and simple

Just pull out and let the UN handle things :roll:

I am against the war, against the premise that just because something might happen, the United States has the right to invade whomever they like. But now that they and the Brits and the rest are in there, they can't leave the job half finished - they have to rebuild what they in plain terms broke during the invasion.

I especially feel sorry for the actual troops and military in Iraq at the moment - I am sure that they no longer want to be there, after the triumph in April/May last year. They were ordered in by someone who used family connections to get out of the draft in Vietnam, who had all the goodwill in the world after Sept 11 and squandered it away in this rush to get rid of Saddam, and does not seem to have any concept of the word 'responsibility' or the phrase 'the buck stops here'.

Whoever thought that Bush 41 should have taken over Baghdad back in 91 has hopefully been disabused of that position. Even though I am against the war in principle it is heartrending to see the waste of human lives on the news every night - tonight on the PBS news (which is the only American news show we get here in Oz), there were TWENTY EIGHT in memoriams.

I supported the war in Kosovo, I supported the war in Afghanistan, I wish the world had done more in Rwanda ten years ago, but am against the war in Iraq. The West needs to finish what it tried to start though.

Op/Ed Piece, 16 April 2004
Victoria Dominion (main newspaper of Nainamo's capital city)

i dont agree with any of your choices. We belong in iraq weather or not the UN likes it, Once we take it and get it stable it will return to a deplomatic type government and we wil pull out
I agree with you. The situation in Iraq is getting out of hand but if we let this idiot get into power the same thing will happen all over again like Saddam all over again only worse. I say, we do our job and get out of Iraq when the job is done.

Once we take it and get it stable it will return to a deplomatic type government and we wil pull out

Oh, just like with Serbia!

After we rebuild Iraq the Iraqis will love us forever -- oh sure we'll have to fight a bloody civil war there for years and years... maybe the violence will spill over into Iran and Syria, but in the end it will be like another Hawaii.

Of course, I didn't agree with the starting of this war, who did?
War is killing people, isn't it?
And it's not like it was a necessary evil, it didn't achieve anything.
Removing Saddam from power was quite useless without an alternative. Now the choice we have is between islamic extremists and another Saddam.

Of course, I didn't agree with the starting of this war, who did?
War is killing people, isn't it?
And it's not like it was a necessary evil, it didn't achieve anything.
Removing Saddam from power was quite useless without an alternative. Now the choice we have is between islamic extremists and another Saddam.

The naysayers must give us time there psylos..we're trying to rebuild a nation and a government all under the ever-critical eyes of the world while trying to get it's economy going after it's stagnation AND all the while trying to subdue the varying factions who have committed violence or are jockeying for power after the change over.

It took the United States 13 yrs of PEACEFUL effort after the Revolutionary War for all the colonies to sign a document that all would agree on...the present Constitution.

The naysayers must give us time there psylos..we're trying to rebuild a nation and a government all under the ever-critical eyes of the world while trying to get it's economy going after it's stagnation AND all the while trying to subdue the varying factions who have committed violence or are jockeying for power after the change over.

It took the United States 13 yrs of PEACEFUL effort after the Revolutionary War for all the colonies to sign a document that all would agree on...the present Constitution.13 years? that's not what I would call long. In my country, it took something like 1500 years, because we didn't have a real national identity before and the several tribes were fighting each other, and also the foreigners were attacking us all the time. Only after we became really strong enough to drive the foreigners (attackers) out of the country and to become a stable country could we start building a constitution, and that was after a bloody civil war.

The naysayers must give us time there psylos..we're trying to rebuild a nation and a government all under the ever-critical eyes of the world while trying to get it's economy going after it's stagnation AND all the while trying to subdue the varying factions who have committed violence or are jockeying for power after the change over.

It took the United States 13 yrs of PEACEFUL effort after the Revolutionary War for all the colonies to sign a document that all would agree on...the present Constitution.13 years? that's not what I would call long. In my country, it took something like 1500 years, because we didn't have a real national identity before and the several tribes were fighting each other, and also the foreigners were attacking us all the time. Only after we became really strong enough to drive the foreigners out of the country and to become a stable country could we start building a constitution, and that was after a bloody civil war.

See...and did anyone tell yours to Get out....that it obviously was a huge mistake..etc..etc..so if it took your nation 1500..don't you think the US should be given some slack...it's only been a year....don't you think?

See...and did anyone tell yours to Get out....that it obviously was a huge mistake..etc..etc..so if it took your nation 1500..don't you think the US should be given some slack...it's only been a year....don't you think?But we are talking about Iraq here. The US has already a constitution.

It took the United States 13 yrs of PEACEFUL effort after the Revolutionary War for all the colonies to sign a document that all would agree on...the present Constitution.

and we did it all on our own... after kicking out the occupying forces that had ruled over us!

See...and did anyone tell yours to Get out....that it obviously was a huge mistake..etc..etc..so if it took your nation 1500..don't you think the US should be given some slack...it's only been a year....don't you think?But we are talking about Iraq here. The US has already a constitution.

Yes...and like I said..we only did it 13 yrs AFTER the war was successfully concluded..we're trying to get them to all agree on something WHILE we are also engaged in combat...our resources are divided..and these people are just as divided as the 13 colonies were...each one vying for control, each faction thinking they have a better claim..we are attempting something not done before....in a society and culture that has preferred autocrats, monarchs, tribal chieftains, religous oligarchies, and despots we are trying to instill a belief that all should have a say in their government..once the belief takes hold...then perhaps they won't resort to killing each other as well as anyone else that is in their way.

Yes...and like I said..we only did it 13 yrs AFTER the war was successfully concluded..we're trying to get them to all agree on something WHILE we are also engaged in combat...our resources are divided..and these people are just as divided as the 13 colonies were...each one vying for control, each faction thinking they have a better claim..we are attempting something not done before....in a society and culture that has preferred autocrats, monarchs, tribal chieftains, religous oligarchies, and despots we are trying to instill a belief that all should have a say in their government..once the belief takes hold...then perhaps they won't resort to killing each other as well as anyone else that is in their way.

wait... I'm confused: this is supposed to be an arguement supporing the occupation?

you do realize that the Americans were the same race as the British and still didn't want to live under their occupation, so why do you think the Iraqis will want to live under American occupation?

Yes...and like I said..we only did it 13 yrs AFTER the war was successfully concluded..we're trying to get them to all agree on something WHILE we are also engaged in combat...our resources are divided..and these people are just as divided as the 13 colonies were...each one vying for control, each faction thinking they have a better claim..we are attempting something not done before....in a society and culture that has preferred autocrats, monarchs, tribal chieftains, religous oligarchies, and despots we are trying to instill a belief that all should have a say in their government..once the belief takes hold...then perhaps they won't resort to killing each other as well as anyone else that is in their way.

wait... I'm confused: this is supposed to be an arguement supporing the occupation?

you do realize that the Americans were the same race as the British and still didn't want to live under their occupation, so why do you think the Iraqis will want to live under American occupation?

Yeah, and conveniently Salishe overlooks the fact that the 13 colonies were culturally compatible, so basically it was like a family trying to settle an argument. Now we have the Western World versus Islamic Iraq, totally incompatible cultures with traditions that have nothing in common with each other.

ok, for those of you who want to stay until it is stable and then pull out, because that DOES seem logical right?

who do you think the irais are going to elect in a general election? remember what region you are talking about what these ppl have been through... i GARAUNTEE that within 5 years of us leaving that country the muslim clerics will be in charge... BECAUSE THATS WHAT THE PEOPLE WANT!! the only way to keep it from becoming a radical muslim country is to have it run by an iron fisted dictator.. im sorry but thats just how it is.. neither is a good option, so i dont see why we are fighting to create another iran..

Yes...and like I said..we only did it 13 yrs AFTER the war was successfully concluded..we're trying to get them to all agree on something WHILE we are also engaged in combat...our resources are divided..and these people are just as divided as the 13 colonies were...each one vying for control, each faction thinking they have a better claim..we are attempting something not done before....in a society and culture that has preferred autocrats, monarchs, tribal chieftains, religous oligarchies, and despots we are trying to instill a belief that all should have a say in their government..once the belief takes hold...then perhaps they won't resort to killing each other as well as anyone else that is in their way.

wait... I'm confused: this is supposed to be an arguement supporing the occupation?

you do realize that the Americans were the same race as the British and still didn't want to live under their occupation, so why do you think the Iraqis will want to live under American occupation?

Yeah, and conveniently Salishe overlooks the fact that the 13 colonies were culturally compatible, so basically it was like a family trying to settle an argument. Now we have the Western World versus Islamic Iraq, totally incompatible cultures with traditions that have nothing in common with each other.

Not overlooking it..in fact some would say those colonies were just as incompatible..remember as I stated..it took us 13 yrs to come to agreement on signing the Constitution..for example...Maryland was overwhelming Catholic..that irked some of the Puritain Northeast..the southern states were adamant that no mention of slavery be added to it, etc, etc..while the root stock may indeed be the same, it is so in Iraq, their root stock is the same....give us some time..mercy..it's only been a year, and that one was under fire...it took us at least 6 yrs for both Germany, and Japan, and that was during peace and with a populace that was well-educated, industrous, and earnest in reconstruction.....the factions that are fighting the coalition aren't interested in reconstruction but getting their piece of the power pie..

Actually I think it is Western world versus kurds versus shiites versus sunites versus communists versus virtually everything which is present in 'Iraq' (which once was Babylon, remember the biblical Babylon tower?). So the question to you all is :
Can Iraq be still maintained in one piece?
In my opinion, only the kurds majoritarily want a separate country, because they can not have power anyway. The shiites would not want a separate country because they make the big majority of the country and therefore can have an islamic state imposed on the whole country. The sunites think they can have a big power as well thanks to the americans. The americans would not want the shiites control the oil reserves and therefore would not want the country to be cut in pieces.
What do you think? Is it going to end in civil war bloodshed, is one group going to take power and impose it on others in a Saddam dictatorship like Iraq or will the country be cut into small pieces (in which case the civil war wil happen in Turkey). What do you think?
2nd question : do you think the violence will spread (Iran, Israel, Palestine, Turkey, etc...)?

Of course, I didn't agree with the starting of this war, who did?
War is killing people, isn't it?
And it's not like it was a necessary evil, it didn't achieve anything.
Removing Saddam from power was quite useless without an alternative. Now the choice we have is between islamic extremists and another Saddam.

The naysayers must give us time there psylos..we're trying to rebuild a nation and a government all under the ever-critical eyes of the world while trying to get it's economy going after it's stagnation AND all the while trying to subdue the varying factions who have committed violence or are jockeying for power after the change over.

It took the United States 13 yrs of PEACEFUL effort after the Revolutionary War for all the colonies to sign a document that all would agree on...the present Constitution.

So do you think that if the present state of chaos in Iraq lasted for 13 years before a lasting peace is achieved that this would be an acceptable state of affairs?