NationStates Jolt Archive

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061122/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq

My questions are simple.

1. Is this experiment worth the loss of life that it has caused? I consider and Iraqis life to be as valuable as mine and I hope you do as well.

2. Are we making the situation worse or better by our presence?

3. At what point would the loss of life be too great for you to support the war, if there is such a point for you?

4. Finally, are you willing to declare a civil war in Iraq?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061122/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq

My questions are simple.

1. Is this experiment worth the loss of life that it has caused? I consider and Iraqis life to be as valuable as mine and I hope you do as well.

2. Are we making the situation worse or better by our presence?

3. At what point would the loss of life be too great for you to support the war, if there is such a point for you?

4. Finally, are you willing to declare a civil war in Iraq?

1) No. It's not worth the loss of life or the monetary cost. I don't, however, consider an Iraqi's life to be as valuable as mine.

2) Flip a coin. Who knows? Maybe we're giving the Iraqi government time to build a security force that can enforce peace when we're gone, maybe we're just making more people angry by being there.

3) I never supported the war, but if the war was necessary to keep the USA safe I wouldn't really care how many enemies or enemy civilians die.

1. To keep oil flowing is worth the loss of life. An Iraqis' life might be as valuable as ours but we don't have oil.

2. Making the situation worse or better by our presence is irrelevant if the oil is flowing west.

3. The loss of life would be too great to support the war if we're still there when the oil has run out.

4. Civil war in Iraq? They can do what they like as long as they leave the oil alone.

1. To keep oil flowing is worth the loss of life. An Iraqis' life might be as valuable as ours but we don't have oil.

2. Making the situation worse or better by our presence is irrelevant if the oil is flowing west.

3. The loss of life would be too great to support the war if we're still there when the oil has run out.

4. Civil war in Iraq? They can do what they like as long as they leave the oil alone.
Has George finally "come out the closet", so to speak?:eek:

1) No. It's not worth the loss of life or the monetary cost. I don't, however, consider an Iraqi's life to be as valuable as mine.

Then you are a moron. AN Iraqi is just as valuable as you, possibly more since that kind of statement.

Then you are a moron. AN Iraqi is just as valuable as you, possibly more since that kind of statement.

No, not to me he's not. He's also not as valuable to me as one of my fellow US citizens. I'm sure the average Iraqi thinks his life is more valuable than mine. It's just human nature.

As for your moron comment, well, I'm not allowed to counterflame because last time I was banned for three days and warned that I was close to being permanently removed from the forum. Good for you. You get to flame and not be flamed back. How happy you must feel.

Think about this for one moment. One side is trying to keep civie casualties to a minimum. The other side is a group of people who don't care who is civie and who is military.

Bottom line: You will have civie casualties in any conflict, it's enevitable with people living in war zones. This conflict features terrorist groups who have no problems sending death squads around to kill people who A. support the US B. support the other groups or C. or just standing in a wrong place wrong time. They are trying to cause social termoil and civil war by causing civilian frustration to Iraqi and coalition forces as well as the current government by thier killing of civilians. While I do not have a answer as to what we could do to help I will say that civilian deaths will soar if we pull out and civil war erupts.