|
Anna |
The transition of power of Iraq from America and back to the people of Iraq is fast upon us; but is Iraq capable of such independence? The decision to hand over Iraq by the June 30th deadline was made on November 15th. At this time, Americans were still riding the buzz they had just gotten from overthrowing Saddam Hussein and it probably didn’t cross their minds that they might not be able to convert everyone over to American ideals in just 9 months. With news of fresh killings of Americans by Iraqi militants on the news every day, it makes me seriously doubt that we have control over what exists now, let alone built up the native forces to be strong enough to handle a country that is in such turmoil. American forces seem to even have problems maintaining peace among themselves. As demonstrated by the abuse of prisoners at Abugrab, American military forces are either unaware of what their troops are doing, or they are using more violent and immoral methods than normally used, going against the American constitution. While fighting this war on terrorism, we are actually adding to the cause, giving them more reason to hate, and even sinking to their level. |
Catherine |
War in Iraq was a bad idea from the start. Now we are stuck in a really terrible situation where we won't win either way. Now, if we pull our troops out of the war, everyone will hate America for meddling and not fixing what we messed up. If we stay in, we are fighting a losing battle and causing a lot of unnecessary heartache. Bush needs to relinquish his control on the other side of the world. He has no business trying to "help" and swindle their oil, after all, that's obviously what the war is about. There is no way we can leave quietly, and we definitely do not want a war to break out if surrounding countries start squabbling for control.
At this point, Bush and his administration have killed more Iraqis than Saddam. What was the point of going into Iraq, if we are just going to take out one bad dictator only to be replaced by yet another?
|
Allie |
I am not a supporter of Bush, and I also believe the "War" in Iraq was an awful idea from the start, but it's not like we didn't have reasons for going in, whether they are good reasons or bad. For one thing, after the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the Twin Towers, everyone was and still is jumpy about any sort of terrorism, especially involving the middle eastern nations. So the Bush administration gets this great idea, "Hey, Saddam's kind of a bad guy, right? And he's from the same place as those terrorists! Let's make it a human rights issue to get interest and support from the public, while really going in and stealing their oil!" They used the pretense of an evil tyrant bent on US destruction, calling on patriotism as an excuse and their reason for invading a country? Simply defending humans from this "satanic" ruler. Now, many months after the beginning of the attack on Iraq [it cannot be rightfully called a war unless both sides say so] we have caught Saddam Hussein, but what about the weapons of mass destruction? What about the hundreds of deaths of Iraqi citizens, American soldiers, and any non-Iraqi civilians just traveling through the country? Have their deaths been justified? Iraq is still in political turmoil- they need politicians who can save their country from the depths of poverty, not more soldiers creating fights in the streets. |
Rebecca |
The war in Iraq should not be called a war. That is due to the fact that this "war" is plainly unjust, if it is even possible for a war to be just in the first place. It is also going on under very shady circumstances. For example, do you have an idea on how this WAR(??) began? Why this WAR(??) was even started? You are probably thinking something lame about the onslaught on the World Trade Centers and the Pentagon; but then again what does any of that have to do with Saddam, the head honcho of the "evil" country we are "fighting" against? The "evil" country in which good ol' Dubya tries to put all blame and the driving force of American patriotism upon so that...what world peace?...no nuclear war??...comes upon us Americans? JEEZ the attack on our country came about due to OSAMA BIN LADEN who OH MY GOOD GOLLY GOSH we haven't captured yet! Though we have Saddam!! HAZZA HAZZA we have Saddam!! yah right. I'm not saying capturing him was a bad thing, if anything it was almost better to get him then Osama because he had more power to cause more pain and destruction. Saddam killed his own citizens which as far as I know, doesn't make you gain any brownie points with the people of your country and other countries. But really, it was Osama who attacked us "strong" and "heroic" Americans on our turf. Not Saddam. Then why, may you ask, have we already captured Saddam, not Osama? It doesn't make sense, does it? I guess you could say Osama hides better, but really, does that excuse truly sound circumstantial? Couldn't have good ol' Dubya tried as hard to capture Osama as he did Saddam? Truly, he probably could have if he had really wanted to. It most likely would have been easier to capture Osama, not Saddam, considering Osama was wondering through deserts and mountains with only a handful of men to guard and protect him. Saddam had MANY more people and places to keep him safe from the reconnaissance of American soldiers trying to find him. I mean seriously, Saddam was the LEADER of his country. He must have had a more than substantial amount of followers to help him in his time of need. Then why may you ask, is Saddam the one locked up under heavy guard probably in some small uncharted island? I guess you could say it is all in the family. Wow probably by now you are like "what is this person talking about? It is all in the family? That makes no sense whatsoever!!" Oh, but you see, that is where you are wrong. The "war" in Iraq is all in the family. See, what few people know is that when Dubya's father was in office, Saddam's men tried to assisinate Senior Bush. Another thing that the news-illiterate may not know, is that Senior Bush has another son besides Dubya. His name is Jeb, and he is the governor of Florida. If you know a thing or two about Democracy, you should know that during a nation-wide election, most of the time the bigger states get more electoral votes (sort of like big chunks of votes) because of the larger poppulations. And look, Florida is a pretty big state!! So if you think about it, Senior Bush had been plotting out his way to stay in power for a very long time... See, Senior would try and get Dubya in to the presidential office he once had. His other son was already the governor of Florida, so Dubya would gain a lot of votes because he was directly related to Jeb. For example: The votes from Florida would be like the "free" part in a "buy one get one free" sale becaue Jeb was Florida's governor and most Floridians would probably vote for Bush because they would like Jeb or and would probably think that if Jeb was good, Dubya probably would be too. Or, they would just be like "Hey, Jeb is a familiar face...Why not vote for his sibling?" And the "buy one" part would be like the fact that there had already been a Bush in office. The Senior Bush being a not-so bad but not-so great president. Also some people would be like "hey, I remember Senior Bush and he didn't totally mess up our country so hey I will just vote for his son because maybe the apple doesn't fall far from the tree...(?)" So to put it nice and clear, Senior Bush was like a puppeteer and Dubya and Jeb were just like his puppets in his plan to get back at Iraq. OH I SAID IT! Look, remember what I said about the assasination attempt on Senior Bush by Saddam's people and how I thought it was odd that SADDAM was the one captured, not Osama the man who caused the death and destruction of American citizens, on our turf, in our most recent past?? Doesn't that sound kind of crooked? Doesn't that sound sort of odd? That is because it makes it seem that it is not Dubya governing our country, but his father, Senior Bush. I must tell you that I do not want a puppet as a president, though I will bow to the fact that Dubya is probably not a total puppet. That is most likely because of the fact that there are some really intense Bush haters and people who know so much more about whats going on around in our world than I. They would realize and point out what I have and better about Dubya being a puppet and it would be a much more widely idolized idea. Okay well I shall now close this article with just the point that I belive that Dubya is a puppet of Senior Bush and that really needs to change. I am not saying that in this election coming up that Kerry should be elected president, because well he isn't the best man either. All I am saying is that the puppetry of our government really needs to end becuase that is against what democracy is all about. Isn't that what our whole country is built on, the hope and freedom of Democracy? I hope so. |