stable, peaceful iraq? when?!

[spillmind]

is it *ever* going to be stable in that region?

i just don't see investors from the world community helping to rebuild iraq with things like this:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20031001/wl_nm/iraq_dc_102

happening regularly!

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by spillmind
is it *ever* going to be stable in that region?

i just don't see investors from the world community helping to rebuild iraq with things like this:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20031001/wl_nm/iraq_dc_102

happening regularly!

I say we give them a little longer than 6 months to make any drastic changes. The fact that these people are out of their houses and have the ability to complain now says a lot! They probably would have been executed on the spot by the old regime.

Even Germany changed their minds about funding the rebuilding effort. Progress will be slow, but when the community realizes things are changing for the better they will be more likely to toss a few bucks into the effort.

 

[janeeng]

I have to agree, I can't see how 6 months can do the job, much more time needed. You can't take a country and perfect it in a day, time is needed. And yes, had they been out bitching while Hussein was there, death would be upon them.

 

[Spirit_Soul]

There were ways of getting saddham out of power. It didn't have to cost so many extra lives.

I feel so sad for the people who live in Iraq. Just imagine, you were living under an oppressive ruler and didn't have any freedom to say anything, but you had a nice house to live in, you had kids, you had a husband or a wife... you were happy even though you were oppressed.

But now...

War starts, destruction everywhere, Chaos... and then comes freedom, but what is freedom when you have no Job, you have no money to feed your kids, what sort of a parent would you be if you couldn't feed your children. You wouldn't have food to eat yourself, no electricity, thieves everywhere, people released from prisons... mobs going around... Gangsters threatening your streets... its just so horrible.

When you protest in those desperate conditions driven by hunger, you then get shot at with guns by a very well trained army, what kind of freedom is that?

Now I know why I can't sleep in the night these days ....

 

[jimnyc]

There were ways of getting saddham out of power. It didn't have to cost so many extra lives.

Please name these ways. And keep in mind, it was an entire regime, not just one man.

I feel so sad for the people who live in Iraq. Just imagine, you were living under an oppressive ruler and didn't have any freedom to say anything, but you had a nice house to live in, you had kids, you had a husband or a wife... you were happy even though you were oppressed.

I'm not sure they were "happy" with their lives pre-war, probably just content to be alive.

War starts, destruction everywhere, Chaos... and then comes freedom, but what is freedom when you have no Job, you have no money to feed your kids, what sort of a parent would you be if you couldn't feed your children. You wouldn't have food to eat yourself, no electricity, thieves everywhere, people released from prisons... mobs going around... Gangsters threatening your streets... its just so horrible.

Agreed, war IS horrible, but a necessary evil at times. The jobs and money will come with time. These people had to have known it would be a slow start and a long effort to start thriving after the past regimes ouster. What you describe is not what ALL Iraqi's are experiencing. Things will get worse before getting better was what people stated as the war effort began. I think things are already much better there, but there is obviously a long way to go.

When you protest in those desperate conditions driven by hunger, you then get shot at with guns by a very well trained army, what kind of freedom is that?

Protesting is fine, attacking police officers is not! And they shot in the air and not at the protesters. In fact, no casualties were even reported. I think they acted quite appropriately.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/10/01/sprj.irq.main/index.html

 

[Spirit_Soul]

The general public anywhere and especially common people in any instance only go ballistic and start attacking people is due to desperation .

It is not their fault. They were atleast happy to be alive , you can go ahead and live in your notions of freedom, but what good is freedom when you are starving to death in misery.

The fact is we should have not made it so easy for them to go chaotic after the war.

If bush kept "Iraqi people" in mind while attacking it like he said, then would not make the things go so chaotic : examples : setting "good" people as well as psycho murderers free from Iraqi prisons.

If this was to happen after the war, then there should have been another way to solve this problem. Suffering of one group of innocents is not to be traded for the saving of other another group of innocents, its not right and its not fair.

 

[jimnyc]

There is a TON of unemployment in Iraq that is causing most of the issues, and in time this will get better. Those that cannot afford food at this time can get what they need to survive through the "Public Distribution System". This will need to increase as things progress for it to have a significant impact and will be costly. This is where the UN and committed countries come into play. This is why the USA is asking for monetary contributions to the rebuild effort in Iraq. We have already dedicated 22 billion dollars.

http://wwww.reliefweb.int/w/rwb.nsf/0/d7a2bb4c4b505f71c1256daa002f2c51?OpenDocument

Lives get taken during and because of war. This is unfortunate, but not something that was overlooked.

You seem to be basing current conditions as a gauge as to how Iraqi living conditions will be in the upcoming years. It will improve MORE than drastically.

Liberals will claim outrage that soldiers and those involved in humanitarian efforts are still stuck in Iraq. In the next breath they will claim we aren't doing enough to help.

If this was to happen after the war, then there should have been another way to solve this problem. Suffering of one group of innocents is not to be traded for the saving of other another group of innocents, its not right and its not fair.

War is never fair. Lives sometimes are lost when a battle is taken to save an entire country. Precautions were taken to avoid civilian casualties and full efforts are being taken to assist in the aftermath. What more can you do? Suggestions?

 

[spillmind]

' This is why the USA is asking for monetary contributions to the rebuild effort in Iraq. We have already dedicated 22 billion dollars.'

jim, you ever wonder why 'other' nations have only pledged 2 billion to our 22?

why is it we can't invest a more balanced amount into building as we spent destroying?

btw: looks like those new emoticons are catching on like wildfire.

 

[Dan]

Look at it from a humanistic point of view. There's a chance that these wonderful changes won't come about for many many years (and, yes, this is a hypothetical, just like the idea that Iraq is going to be a beautiful place in a short amount of time is nothing more than a hypothetical). Do you really think the average Iraqi is sitting around thinking "well, things are sure as hell crappy for us now, but in the future they'll be great!"

 

[jimnyc]

jim, you ever wonder why 'other' nations have only pledged 2 billion to our 22?

Some didn't agree with our decision to override the UN and go into Iraq. Some are using it as a bargaining position to either get work in the rebuild effort or an exchange in power. If everyone is so worried about the people, why not use full resources to contribute? So the USA is wrong for not thinking of the people when going to war, but now it's ok for everyone to snub the rebuild effort when it only hurts the Iraqi people?

why is it we can't invest a more balanced amount into building as we spent destroying?

You spend so much on technology during the war to avoid as many military casualties for our soldiers as possible. Our goal entering the war was to oust the regime terrorizing it's own people in Iraq and those involved in worldwide terrorism. This objective has made huge progress and it was money well spent in my opinion. What you're seeing now is the effort to get the country balanced and running smoothly while avoiding pockets of attacks that still exist. The international community *should* be just as interested and committed to rebuilding Iraq. If they didn't see dissension within our country, where the democrats are more interested in political motives than national security, their might be more of an interest in contributing. The fact that anyone would want to *penalize* us for the way we controlled the situation is counter effective to the Iraqi people.

btw: looks like those new emoticons are catching on like wildfire.

I guess my 30 seconds of work to apply them was worth it then! I'm glad you finally approve of something. :finger:

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Dan
Look at it from a humanistic point of view. There's a chance that these wonderful changes won't come about for many many years (and, yes, this is a hypothetical, just like the idea that Iraq is going to be a beautiful place in a short amount of time is nothing more than a hypothetical). Do you really think the average Iraqi is sitting around thinking "well, things are sure as hell crappy for us now, but in the future they'll be great!"

I believe you've made some comments in another thread about McVeigh and his belief he was going to heaven for his dirty work. You were responded to and asked for additional proof of what you were claiming and links were provided disputing your claims. You ran away from that thread faster than France from a war. When you respond there, I'll respond to you here.

** Not to mention your hypothetical scenarios have already been covered in this very thread, just not directly **

Ahhhh, what the hell, I'll respond!

Your saying that the changes (that I feel will be for the better) will come about in years to come is only hypothetical. I disagree as many positives have already been implemented. I don't have time right now to give a complete list, but do a bit of research on their schooling, police force, upcoming government, oil program... Their are vast improvements being made. Now do some research on these things pre-war and let me know how rosy the future looked in those areas.

 

[spillmind]

'Some didn't agree with our decision to override the UN and go into Iraq. Some are using it as a bargaining position to either get work in the rebuild effort or an exchange in power. If everyone is so worried about the people, why not use full resources to contribute? So the USA is wrong for not thinking of the people when going to war, but now it's ok for everyone to snub the rebuild effort when it only hurts the Iraqi people?'

while i see what you are basically saying here, there are some inconsistencies.

a) no one will bring their companies there in a full scale attempt to set up shop while there is the current state of choas. for all the speculation, i still think the region is just too unstable for it to ever be safe. and if we pour years and trillions into it? is that really worth it?

b) no one gives a shit about the iraqi people.

c) you are turning the last sentence around. first answer why we so neglected the well-being of the people and are now plugging the humanitarian issue all over. your question will then answer itself.

'This objective has made huge progress and it was money well spent in my opinion.' and i respectfully disagree! (until i saw your last statement on the post) *sigh* ahh well. the violence and the attempted coups will never end in that region. the next democratically elected leader of iraq is doomed to be assassinated.

when we can't even invest half of what we spent to rebuild, it shows other countries where our priorities stand.

and again, statements like this: 'You seem to be basing current conditions as a gauge as to how Iraqi living conditions will be in the upcoming years. It will improve MORE than drastically.'

-are amazingly optimistic, especially if dubya's out next year. it's just funny how those who supported the was were overly pessimistic and rushed to judgement (in my opinion), but now have stars in their eyes, just chock full of optimisim! this doesn't seem oddly self-serving to anyone else?!

and check this: 'If they didn't see dissension within our country, where the democrats are more interested in political motives than national security, their might be more of an interest in contributing.' i guess you aren't perfect either, eh?


but i'll give you props are trying to answer those tough questions, even if you did flip me off ^__^

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by Spirit_Soul
The general public anywhere and especially common people in any instance only go ballistic and start attacking people is due to desperation.
It is not their fault. They were atleast happy to be alive, you can go ahead and live in your notions of freedom, but what good is freedom when you are starving to death in misery.

What the US has done in toppling Saddam is to provide liberty to millions. When you say that we should have let them be becasue they were happy to be alive, I have to question a couple of things:
1. Were they really happy to be alive? Would you be happy if you couldn't speak your mind, if a mistaken word resulted in you and your family being thrown in jail, when thousands of your fellow countrymen were gassed by your country's leader, and you just might be next? I would be miserable in such circumstances, food or not. Interviews with people living under the regime have said as much. It was not a fun, happy place to be. As it is now, they have life and the opportunity to help their families prosper even more - something not available under Saddam's regime.
2. Are you satisfied with leaving people in such tyranny? Now I know that we can't be the world's liberator, but if we have the chance to strike a blow to terrorists and liberate millions, I think it is a noble cause for us to pursue.

The fact is we should have not made it so easy for them to go chaotic after the war.
If bush kept "Iraqi people" in mind while attacking it like he said, then would not make the things go so chaotic : examples : setting "good" people as well as psycho murderers free from Iraqi prisons.
If this was to happen after the war, then there should have been another way to solve this problem. Suffering of one group of innocents is not to be traded for the saving of other another group of innocents, its not right and its not fair.

When a government is eradicated, there is going to be a time of comparative anarchy. It is extremely naive to think that we could have just liberated millions, and be able to rebuild the Iraqi infrastructure and transition to a democratic form of government without any additional crime, voices of dissent, etc. And by the way - do you know what happened to the voices of dissent in Saddam's Iraq? Their tongues often were cut out!

I don't like seeing the chaos in Iraq any more than you do. However, in the long run (read: the next couple of years) I have no doubt that the Iraqi people will be better off, the Iraqi government will be favorable to good relations with the US, and Iraqi companies will be trading with other companies worldwide.

 

[NightTrain]

Spilly, I'm still waiting for your backup on the statements you tried to pass off as truth.. let's be thorough in your education, shall we? I clearly asked you several times for proof on your points.

It's been a few days; more than ample for you to provide credible sources.

What's the holdup?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

I say we give them a little longer than 6 months to make any drastic changes. The fact that these people are out of their houses and have the ability to complain now says a lot! They probably would have been executed on the spot by the old regime.

Well its been about 2 1/2 years now, and the violence is higher than it was when you wrote this post.

 

[Shattered]

Well its been about 2 1/2 years now, and the violence is higher than it was when you wrote this post.

What the hell are you doing? Have you nothing better to do than go around trolling?

1) Step away from the computer.
2) Move slowly toward your front door.
3) Open your front door.
4) Step outside your front door (don't be afraid - it's ok).
5) Continue to put one foot in front of the other, until you've found some decent entertainment value. Stop. Watch. Listen. Participate.

 

[Hobbit]

What the hell are you doing? Have you nothing better to do than go around trolling?

1) Step away from the computer.
2) Move slowly toward your front door.
3) Open your front door.
4) Step outside your front door (don't be afraid - it's ok).
5) Continue to put one foot in front of the other, until you've found some decent entertainment value. Stop. Watch. Listen. Participate.

I think ST is actually a bot. I mean, think about it. He just says the same thing over and over with no original thought. The posts he quotes also don't always correspond to the post he quotes them in. I wonder how long it took for them to code the ST liberal chat algorithm?

 

[Gunny]

What the hell are you doing? Have you nothing better to do than go around trolling?

1) Step away from the computer.
2) Move slowly toward your front door.
3) Open your front door.
4) Step outside your front door (don't be afraid - it's ok).
5) Continue to put one foot in front of the other, until you've found some decent entertainment value. Stop. Watch. Listen. Participate.

Gee, Princess, how do you REALLY feel?

 

[Gunny]

I think ST is actually a bot. I mean, think about it. He just says the same thing over and over with no original thought. The posts he quotes also don't always correspond to the post he quotes them in. I wonder how long it took for them to code the ST liberal chat algorithm?

Correction: "a seriously DELUSIONAL bot."

 

[SpidermanTuba]

I think ST is actually a bot. I mean, think about it. He just says the same thing over and over with no original thought. The posts he quotes also don't always correspond to the post he quotes them in. I wonder how long it took for them to code the ST liberal chat algorithm?

Unlike LuvRPGirl, who has the original thought to start thread after after thread of verbatim copies of articles he's found.