NationStates Jolt Archive

I was wondering how NSers think politically, economically, and physically the US invasion and occupation of Iraq has influenced the country and its citizenry over these last two years. What kind of an impact has it had? Do you think life in general is better or worse for the average Iraqi now vs then? Or have things not changed much since pre-invasion Iraq? Your thoughts...

Well, hope was given, then taken away. I would say the disillusionment which seems to have prevailed is to be expected.

The oil industry is b0rked every bit as bad as under sanctions. The US EIA publishes the monthly figures for that.

And of course anectdotal evidence from news reports suggests that provision of water and electricity has not improved overall.

I certainly do not believe life has improved. Dying free is in no way preferable to living under tyranny.

Theres no way any one can say that the invasion of Iraq hasnt influenced that country in any way at least politically, you dont see too much in the way of economic change. Whether it was the right decision, well, that remains to be seen. In fact, I dont think any one will ever know if it was right or wrong... maybe the only success in this whole event was making another liberia?

From what I understand daily life really hasn't changed that much for the average Iraqi. Except for it being slightly less safe to walk the streets.

The totalitarian dictator that commited horrible, cruel demontrations of his power is gone. Life is better.

From what I understand daily life really hasn't changed that much for the average Iraqi. Except for it being slightly less safe to walk the streets.
Well... that and they don't have to worry about being fed feet-first into a plastic shredder if they openly disagree with the new Iraqi government.

I wouldn't know, I try to avoid knowledge of current events. I don't need another source of depression. So, my answer would be a resounding "I don't care either way". :D

I couldn't say; considering the fact I doubt anyone here actually lives in Iraq or knows someone who does, it all depends on what news sources we read, and we all know how much bias those can have

Hmm- No brutal dictator who may pull you off the street and kill you. But the strreet is no longer safe to walk down because of the bombings and the increased crime. Electricty and water are no more constant and in some cases worse than before the war and the overall quality of life has decreased.

All anecdotal but relayed to me by Iraqis who have family there- Sunni, Shia, Christian

Well... that and they don't have to worry about being fed feet-first into a plastic shredder if they openly disagree with the new Iraqi government.

True, now they get killed horribly if they don't openly disagree with the new Iraqi government. ;)

Life's a bitch, ain't it? Damn insurgencies and former loyalists.

Dying free is in no way preferable to living under tyranny.
This guy disagrees!
http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/0553406647.02.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

Well, I voted that life is better for the average Iraqi. And, it is.

But...I don't believe it has been (yet) as much of a total success as some people may believe.

Sure, Saddam is gone. The man who killed, bullied, and tormented the Iraqi people is gone: forever. Most Iraqis are grateful for that.

But, still, obstacles remain. Namely, the insurgency: every day, more and more innocent Iraqi civilians are targeted and killed. It's more than just Americans now. Life under U.S. occupation is no picnic either. The checkpoints and curfews are very inconvenient, sometimes even deadly, as we have seen.

However, I supported the invasion, and I support the occupation (for the time being) because, simply stated, they are necessary.

We really can't judge the successes of a war that has not yet been won. Five or ten years down the road, we'll definitely have a much better picture of the successes and failures of Operation Iraqi Freedom.


(I've been gone from the NationStates forum for a very, very long time. I just realized how much I missed it! :cool: )

In addition, I think that anyone who says that the invasion and subsequent occupations were "total, complete failures" are just being silly, or trying to unleash their rage against the Bush administration in any way possible.

This guy disagrees!
http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/0553406647.02.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

Um... Che was a revolutionary. After "freeing" Cuba, he went to ferment revolt in Congo and Bolivia.

So... he could have stayed free in Cuba. It was "free". He instead to continue being a revolutionary.

So Che prefers dying to being free. :D

Interestingly, Che never tried to lead a revolt in Argentina, his homeland. Perhaps he didn't care to "free" his own friends and family...

It it obvious to any logical person that things are better off now then they were during the Hussein times.

The debate is, HOW better off.

I believe, personally, that going into Iraq was the right thing to do. Saddam was a monster, a threat to his own people, and a factor that destabilized the entire region.

However, the invasion has been gone about in an entirely wrong way. If we waited a little longer and we had planned this properly, the insurgency would have been snuffed out by now.

Well, if you compare both situations, you realise Iraquis are now much worse than what they were under Saddam.
Under Saddam, they were living in a dictatorship, true. But at least they had access to water, estability, not to mention a sovereign government that mantained control of its own oil fields and resources.

Now, under the US occupation, the only benefit Iraquis have gained is some limited freedom of speech. But they are still living in a dictatorship: Anti-US protests are usually repressed with bullets, there is uncertainity, terrorist attacks, conflict, places with no access to water and, the worst of all, the nations resources being put under the imperialist foot of the US multinationals. Corporations like the carlyle group making huge profits thanks to post-war contracts, and the country's oil being sold to the US at cheap, cheap prices - the real purpose of the whole thing.

Interestingly, Che never tried to lead a revolt in Argentina, his homeland. Perhaps he didn't care to "free" his own friends and family...
I'm not a strong supporter of Che, but that sense of reasoning is very stupid.
To begin with, a good part of Che's familiy relocated in Cuba after the revolution, so yes, you could say he 'freed' them.
Secondly, Che perceived Latin America as a single large nation; Argentina was a target too large and powerful to attack with a small guerrilla force.
In fact, Che's attempt to liberate Bolivia had a purpose of securing a base from where to invade argentina, and later the rest of south america.
So yes, liberating Argentina was in Che's plans, but he needed to attack smaller targets first, to secure a base from where to liberate his homeland.

Well, over a thousand people died in May in Iraq from being shot and blown up. Electricity production is down by about 400 megawatts from before the occupation. Crime is way up. Employment is way down.

In popular imagination Saddam's oppression has been replaced by oppression from occupation forces, and fear of crime and terrorist attacks. It's not a good situation. The U.S. has shown little ability to deal effectively with problems, post occupation.

I imagine with the resources the U.S. is putting in place the situation will eventually "stabillize" at a considerably lower death toll per month, but attacks against U.S. forces will probably continue as long as they are there for the forseeable future.

So, life has not improved, but many people are still holding out for a better future. Some have given up on that and decided that the afterlife offers a better deal. They're the ones with explosives strapped to their bodies.