<p>Depends on your perspective. For the future of the US, the war in Iraq is a blessing for the US. But for the rest of the world, it may be a curse, emphasizing the bully image of the US. (I'm not American)</p>
<p>Not trying to refute your statement, but how is the war in Iraq a blessing for the US? Yes, if anything I think it just makes the US look bad and as if it's the world policeman (WHICH IT SHOULDN'T!)</p>
<p>Idealy, there shouldn't be any war. But we don't live in that kind of world, and we never will, no matter how "good" or "worldly" the world's leaders/future leaders may be. There will always be conflict. It would be great if war didn't exist, but it does. Regardless of unwise decision making, all I can do is support the troops and their decision to enlist. I could never do that, whether or not it's for a noble cause.</p>
<p>im for our soldiers, against the war</p>
<p>jcrew, I'm just saying that the War in Iraq will make it possible for the US to secure enough energy fuels to power itself against China and India during the 21st and 22nd century.</p>
<p>*Just my view. I respect jcrew's opinion, but I think my opinion has some validity.</p>
<p>However, by saying I support the troops means I acknowledge that they don't have the choice as to whether they want to fight this war or not, so with that inability to choose, I support their fight, their endeavors, their safety, etc.</p>
<p>They volunteered to fight. There was no draft. Granted not all of them signed up to fight specifically for this war, but you make it like that is the case when it isn't.</p>
<p>I supported the war at the beginning, but once the worst of the fighting in the country stopped we should have gotten out. America does not have to be the police of the world.</p>
<p>"They volunteered to fight. There was no draft. Granted not all of them signed up to fight specifically for this war, but you make it like that is the case when it isn't."</p>
<p>they did volunteer to fight. there was no draft. exactly, it's not like they all chose to fight this war specifically. I'm sure the vast majority of them were already enlisted.... especially since even reserve units were sent there. I bet <1% of them enlisted after the war saying "WOOP I'M GONNA GO KICK SOME TERRORIST ASS!" really, they didn't have a choice. and even if they enlisted after the war had started, knowing what they were getting into, it still doesn't mean they necessarily agree with the premise of the war and the handling of the war. there's no reason not to support them imo</p>
<p>Wow. Just wow. Less than 1%? Are you insane?</p>
<p>maybe a bit of an exaggeration. i apologize. no need to pick out the little details even though i suppose they may be relevant. the point was that i'm fairly certain a very small percent of those soldiers that are fighting in iraq right now, enlisted with underlying political motives parallel to president bush</p>
<p>I am against the unjust war :)</p>
<p>against going into Iraq/actual war, but I am for staying in and getting the job done properly, not withdrawing immediately and leaving the country in utter disarray and a worse state than which we started with</p>
<p>Against having started it, for leaving now. We're just targets.</p>
<p>How can you leave now? You've destroyed a nation, its government, military, and crippled it, and you want to leave and hope it stays together on its own? Don't be naive.</p>
<p>I'd argue that most of the people on this section of the site were not able to vote in 2000 nor in 2004 nor counted in polls.</p>
<p>I recall being afraid that some nuclear weapon might go off, so, in short, I had no clue.</p>
<p>I only say that because the accusatory nature of the above post would get anyone riled up, and that many of those here really didn't destroy anything or choose much at all will only make this a personal argument. Not a debate, or evidently, as it was planned to be, a soapbox to speak from.</p>
<p>Not that I disagree with the premise, of course.</p>
<p>
[quote]
maybe a bit of an exaggeration. i apologize. no need to pick out the little details even though i suppose they may be relevant. the point was that i'm fairly certain a very small percent of those soldiers that are fighting in iraq right now, enlisted with underlying political motives parallel to president bush.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think that the numbers are significantly higher than you would think. After September 11th, military enlistment went up in HUGE NUMBERS. The Iraq War was presented as related to September 11th to the general public and of course the threat of "weapons of destructions" resulted in many more "patriotic" Americans join the war once again. Of course I don't think every single soldier in Iraq right now joined to fight the war on terrorism, there are those enlisted since before even Sep 11th, those with nothing else to do with their life and just join the army only to end up in a war, etc, etc. In the end none of this makes me support the soldiers, nor does it make me hate them. </p>
<p>As it was pointed out before, the obsession with stating that you support the troops is a direct reaction to how the soldiers of Vietnam were treated when they came home (think baby killers). This kind of PC support the troops or you are against America attitude is not good. There is no need to call the troops evil or baby killers and spit on them either of course, but this with us or against us attitude has to end before our own "democracy" takes on the dystopian feel that Orwell thought communism would take.</p>
<p>completely support the war.</p>
<p>dont really wanna get into why. its simple though. there was a threat brewing in the middle east and we needed to stop it from turning into something extremely dangerous. we took down a ruthless dictator and established a democracy. how is it failure? as the saying goes, war must get worse before it can get better. and god damn, it has gotten ALOT better. U.S. stabilization of Iraq is close by. furthermore, like one of our most competent republican candidates said, "isolationism is what put hitler into power."</p>
<p>How can you leave now? You've destroyed a nation, its government, military, and crippled it, and you want to leave and hope it stays together on its own? Don't be naive.</p>
<p>"destroyed a nation" - what did you think war was?</p>
<p>"its government" - in war, I think it's kinda neccessary to take down the government when you're trying to establish a democracy?</p>
<p>"its military" - did you think we'd go into Iraq and take down all threat but spare their military? </p>
<p>I'm sorry, but it sounded like you were just trying to bash the war to get your point across. Something like that could get people rattled up, and just wanted to say that everything you mentioned defines what a war IS.</p>
<p>Is this seriously a new thread? Who could possibly support the war at this point. It should be asking whether or not you want to withdraw the troops, which is how most people responded.</p>
<p>As for me, I support a complete withdrawal. There is no clearly defined goal because there's no reason for us to be there in the first place
(but wait! we're already there so you can't say that!)
Every time we accomplish one of those "goals" (overthrowing the government, capturing saddam's sons, holding elections, capturing and killing saddam, i would say wmd's but that never happened), a new one replaces it. It was at first about getting wmd's, then it changed to getting saddam (his sons weren't expected, a bonus!), then to turning the place into a democracy, and it's sort of been stabilizing the area ever since.</p>
<p>Conclusion: If there is no clearly defined goal, we can't expect to win. We will certainly win these new goals, and eventually, with the surge, Iraq will be stable, but that's irrelevant. We can win as many battles as we fight if we want to (and we almost have), but we're not going to outlast Iraqis and insurgents in their own countries. There's no bigger incentive for the Iraqi's to get up and take care of their own country than for us to withdraw our troops, and stop having the policing their streets.</p>
<p>I believe that the war was good because it's helping to dissolve terrorism around the world. There has to be democratic states in the Middle East to combat terrorism. Also I do not want to withdraw now. If we do withdraw what if the insurgency increases?
I support the war, but I do think it should have been taken less unilaterally. I think the US sent the most troops to Iraq. We should have conferred with other nations to send their troops also. Those are just my $0.02.</p>