ok.. forget the rights and wrongs of our involvement in this conflict, thats a seperate issue from the one im mooting now.

 

we are in iraq... whats happens now? it has become a largely unstable place with death around every corner. should we just pull out leaving the place in turmoil? or should we stick it out, increasing our numbers until the place is stable?..

 

5 guys are missing, have been taken hostage by (its believed) the police!... if there are insurgents in the police, how can iraq ever get back to being a stable country?.. its one huge mess...

Not our problem Rob, there should be an arab UN peace keeping force most of the problems are because arabs don't want western forces on their soil

it is our problem, we chose to saddle up to bush.. we cant just pull out, can we?

Our job was to get rid of Saddam Hussein and that has been accomplished so it is not our job to be peacekeepers the whole thing should be handled by the UN now with a peacekeeping force from Arab nations keeping order among the factions, shi'ites who were the bitterest enemies of Saddam Hussein are trying to blow us to smithereens even though we got rid of Saddam and the simple reason is none of the factions want us there and once we withdraw (the west) then I think things will improve out there

It's a really, really difficult question and I imagine the lack of responses so far reflects this. I am for immediate pullout, not because I feel Iraq's government is ready and not because I feel the UN will step in to take the "peace-keeper" role. But I believe the damage has been done, the moral and ethical blame for this catastrophe already lies with the US/UK. The strategy simply isn't working. We haven't stabilized a thing - even the Green Zone is no longer safe. You can fight small militias which is what we're doing, but you can't prevent suicide bombs and roadside bombs.

 

Again, I'm not saying pullout won't lead to civil war and chaos. It likely will and all the blame lies squarely with Bush/Blair. But frankly, what we're doing right now isn't working and any radical change will require hundreds of thousands of more troops. That's not only technically impossible, it's politically impossible.

Our job was to get rid of Saddam Hussein and that has been accomplished so it is not our job to be peacekeepers the whole thing should be handled by the UN now with a peacekeeping force from Arab nations keeping order among the factions, shi'ites who were the bitterest enemies of Saddam Hussein are trying to blow us to smithereens even though we got rid of Saddam and the simple reason is none of the factions want us there and once we withdraw (the west) then I think things will improve out there

 

Ideally this is definitely the best option, but I just can't seem to work up enough faith in the UN to believe it will happen. When things get ugly, the UN bolts. I mean, I can't necessarily blame them. You say pan-Arab but would you, as an Egyptian, really agree to travel to a deadly war zone and risk your life for a bunch of Iraqis?

Nothing good has hapened... Only that they got Saddam... It will never get right this way

'Our Job' was NOT to get rid of Saddam Hussein!

 

A lot of History has been re-written over the 2003 Events that led to

the invasion of Iraq. (Operation Iraqi Freedom' - OAF. I wonder why

they did not call it, Operation Iraqi Liberation - OIL?)

 

Incase anyone does not remember, Bush & Blair jointly said that Saddam

could stay in Power in Iraq - as long as he handed over his WMD. They DID

make that offer to him in early 2003. It is now forgotten - people think that

we went in because we deeply cared about getting rid of a 'Monster' - but,

we had only just given that 'Monster' the chance to stay in Power. (It is

called hypocrisy).

 

He declined to agree to hand over WMD's - as he had none. (As I argued like crazy before

the War started). I had simply typed into Google:, 'How strong is Iraq in 2003?',

and numerous answers came up. I learned that Iraq was WEAKER in 2003 than it had

been in the first Gulf War. (1990, or 1991)

 

That it had no Missiles capable of flying more than 150 Miles.

 

And, at the same time, I watched as Blair repeated over & over that Iraq

was much stronger than I had learned. and, that it had WMD's that I had learned

did not exist. AND, I watched the Defense Secretary - Geoff Hoon, talk c**p on

'Question Time', (BBC1), about how Iraq was a 'Threat', to the 3,000 UK Troops in Cyprus,

as its WMD's could reach there - when I knew it had no Missiles that could reach

Cyprus.

 

I watched as the White House came up with similar nonsense.

 

Then, we invaded Iraq, & I recall that day after day, 'The Sun', tried hard to

excuse the Invasion, by insisting, 'WMDS found!', & 'Allied Troops In Iraq Find

Al Qaeda Camp!', & every single time - every time - it turned out that 'The Sun'

had got is facts wrong! (The idea was that if you can't find WMD's, then excuse the

Invasion, by finding links between Saddan Hussein, & Al Qaeda - Terrorists. There

were none, as Saddam hated Al Qaeda - he refused to have anything to do with them).

 

So, we got rid of the Tyrant, & then with his Power gone, Al Qaeda poured into

Iraq - and now it kills OUR Troops there! Talk about us being short sighted!!!!!

 

Iraq is worse off now than before we went in - most observers now admit this.

 

UK Troops only seem to be there, so that we don't leave the Americans on their

own - when we & the Americans are simply targets for Extremist Groups there, now.

 

The entire War was created on lies, nonsense, &, (the UK involvement in it), by

stupid UK MP's, who believed everything Blair said, & Voted for a War - when

the answers to it ALL were on the bloody Internet - and they were too stupid to look!

(I lost ALL respect for them in 2003).

 

The Invasion was in fact illegal - because it is Illegal - under International Law,

to invade a Country just to change its Government. One of the reasons why we

hung numerous Nazi Leaders in 1946, was to teach Germany, (& future Governments,

& Countries), that such behaviour would no longer be tolerated. The recently created

United Nations had made it part of its Rules etc.

 

I recall Film Director Michael Winner, insisting that Saddam was the, 'Worst Dictator

of all time!', (UK 'Paper), to try to justify the War. In fact he wasn't - Hitler, & Stalin were

far worse, & maybe the most evil of the lot was Croatian Fascist Leader, Ante Pavelic,

whose Ustashe Party were pals of Hitler, & who did such horrible things to Serbs, & Jews

in World War II, that I nearly vomited when I read it! So another way to try to get

the UK people to want the Iraq War, was to tell lies, & make out that Saddam was more

evil than any Dictator in History!!!!!

 

Then, 2003 comes, & the UK & USA invade Iraq, & do exactly what we told

the Nazis was not allowed anymore - Invaded to get rid of a Government that

we disapproved of.

 

I cannot believe the number of UK people who fell for the lies in 2003!!!!

Edited June 9, 200718 yr by zeus555