Commando

The war in Iraq undertaken in 2003 was a brave decision by George Bush. At the start of the war the Americans were all for it after suspected WMD's and human rights abuses.

The war was fought and won in little over 30 days and Saddam Hussein was found 8 months later and is currently being brought to justice.

The USA however expected guerilla warfare after the occupation started to settle. In the last couple of years constant guerilla warfare has occurred inflicting casualties and fatalaties which now number over 2000 on American forces.

The war in Iraq was the first war fought to oust the brutal dictator Saddam Hussein and in the process ridding the country of WMD's. After two years since the war was over 2000 US soldiers and 30 000 civillians have died. These 32 000 lives were sacrificed to oust this dictator that killed an estimated 600 000 civillians in his reign in power. By figures Saddam Hussein in another 10 years of power would have been involved in the deaths of around 100 000 soldiers and civillians. Hence the war in Iraq has saved a lot more lives than have been lost. The constant violence will continue until the US leaves Iraq. Although the fatalaties and casualties such guerilla violence has implemented is minor to what Saddam would be currently undertaking if still in power. This war by the USA has liberated a country from a hostile dictator and George W Bush should be commended for his actions. The only bad options undertaken by the USA is the inabiltiy the evactuation plan to change leading to America's undirected presence in Iraq.

The actions of some Americans themselves have to be seen as a disgrace lacking direction. The American anti-war protestors did not want America involved in Iraq and therefore wanted a brutal dictator to remain in power killing the innocent. Such anti-war presence that is currently growing in America prevents the USA in forcefully dealing with the nuclear issues in Iran and North Korea because of lack of support. Hence the war has saved lives and liberated a nation although the anti-war protestors have had no meaningful reason to be against the war and have obscured the course of justice by limiting the power of the USA in dealing with those countries accquiring nuclear weapons.

smilingassassin

We should put this in wikipedia, sounds spot on too me.

barrowaj

Haha. It should start as "former US ally" Saddam Hussein.

Garry

I guess SH is reposible for more than 0.6mln....

We should add at least 1mln lives from Iran-Iraq war... though in this he shares resposibility with US, USSR, UK and France - all of them ecouraged him to fight Iran, which was quite stupid to make all the above its direct adversaries first years after islamic revolution. (US, UK were widelly hated for too much intervening into Iranian internal politics..... Iran nationalized oil fields of BP, Total and Unocal.... USSR was a natural adversary of islamic leaders (a Communist Satan) hence Iran supported Afghan rebels against USSR). All listed were happy to help Saddam to fight a bloody war against Iran. Mr Rumsfeld was personally vising Saddam and even photographed with him for local newspapers. That was the reason why neither of the listed above states DID CONDENM massive murger of Kurds with chemical attacks up until 1991...... few years since the case became public and proven. Dictator suited all the above. Though USSR turned positive to Iran since late 1988.... and did not needed Saddam to fight Iran any more.

Now about 32,000. These lives were not sacrificed to oust him. They died after he was gone. Reality never put such a choice - sacrifice 32,000 lives and get rid of Saddam who might kill some thousands of people in future. These died as the result of chaous, which start in Iraq after Saddam has gone. It is subjective oppionion if coalition may have done better and saved much of those lives..... we discussed issues of Iraqi Army.... Police... weapon storages..... smart Bremmer's rule.... elections.... AQ and other terrorists renaisance in Iraq. Looking back seems lots of mistakes could have been avoided. Probably it was harder to see them at that time.

but clearly 32,000 was killed by terrorists under rule of Coalition. So these are responsibility of Coalition.

Saddam is soon be hanged.... but civilians keep on being killed every week.... many tens of them. May be better to reinstate some type of dictatorship by some progressive dictator? Or else it would take at least one generation to build something like democracy, if continuing chaous will not revert the process.

Commando

The war was a success. But people have to realise that in order to get or maintain success/victory their will be consequences such as frequent violence.

Shek

So you support the Iranian Revolutions, the taking hostage of the US embassy and American citizens, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and the highest real gas prices in the history of the United States?

__________________
"So little pains do the vulgar take in the investigation of truth, accepting readily the first story that comes to hand." Thucydides 1.20.3

Shek

Wrong. The coalition, to include the leader, the US, can certainly be blamed for some decisions that have proven to be poor ones and allowed an insurgency to grow. However, let's call a spade a spade, and to drop complete responsibility into the laps of the coalition is faulty. It is not the coalition that has driven car bombs into funeral processions, mosques, and recruiting facilities. It is not the coalition that is sawing heads off and posting the videos to the internet. Let's pin the responsibility on those who are directly responsible and have made a conscious decision to kill civilians in pursuit of their own goals.

smilingassassin

or former French ally...or former russian ally... yes Iraq was an ally...that lost its way and has now been given the change to regain its composure.

Hell it should even say we are fighting side by side with a fromer enemy, Japan, that would just deligitimize the whole war....

Shek

Or members of the evil empire of yesteryear (Ukraine).

smilingassassin

...or even worse those imperialistic British who wish to deny the U.S. independance!!

Besides both the French and Saddam like to wear berrets, they both hate Americans......Saddam is French people!

We've all got it backwords....

barrowaj

The difference between Saddam and Japan is pretty clear. Saddam was the same in the 80s as he is in the 90s. The only thing that changed was the US and our interests. Thats why its retarded to make the argument that we are invading Iraq for humanitarian reasons.

Shek

My argument has always been that it was for US self-interests. However, there was a humanitarian benefit for the Iraqi people as well.

Commando

I think we have to go back to George Bush's declaration of war speech. "Saddam Hussein is a brutal dictator", "liberate the deserved citizens of Iraq". Although humanitarian reasons were not more empahasised then the supposed wmd's there was a humanitarian aspect why war was declared on Iraq.

Leader

How would this be better? People would die quietly and unnoticed? And what about the Kurds? They aren't going to accept some arab dictator. If we picked a Shia, the Sunnis aren't going to quit their subversion. And we're sure as hell not putting another Saddam in there. Democracy is the solution to the problem. It's not going to be easy, but there are no quick fixes to be had.

__________________

Garry

Hi Shek,

Here I apply the most common international principle - everything happaning on occupied territory is responsiblity of occupation force. It is clearly stated there that responsible for action or not acting. Coalition occupied Iraq and took the power from Sadam - this oppened up the country for terrorists who were not there before. Saddam will not murder people - this is great. Terrorists came in is bad. But they had no chance under strong rule. Also Sadam supported Palestinian terrorists but kept them away from his people.

Look - using same logic Russians may say that they are not responsible for those bustards who kidnapped people in Chechnya and that rebels are responsible for so many people being killed in constant fighting between different Chechen groups.

People killed there were killed under their rule..... it is their responsibility. Same for now US in Iraq...... or in Vietnam earlier..... or USSR in Afghanistan. Occupation force is responsible for civilians being killed on occupied territory.

Lets take Faludjah as an expample.... every person tourtured or killed there by terrorists is clearly a responsibility of coalition for not acting for long time. This place should never had been left semi-independent......
________________________________

You are still capable to stop it.... pick a leader.... make him powerfull.... let him rule and controll him to make sure that he is driving towards prosperity. May be I am simplifying things but, seems that without clear leadership of a local group it is not possible to stop chaos which kills many