08 terrorist threat?

[AK1]

I agreed with the military action taken on Iraq and still do. It doesn't matter if Saddam was a threat to us or not, he was a threat to his own people and was commiting mass murder. How can we just sit back and let this happen. Diplomatic channels where used countless times before military action was taken. If we had someone like Saddam running our country, I would want other countries to intervene and help.
The problem with todays society is that alot of people have the attidude of ' it doesn't affect me, so I don't care '. This is the wrong attitude to have. People fail to see the bigger picture and fail to think outside of their own little world. We are all human at the end of the day, and we should all look after eachother, no matter what country we are from. Dictators like Saddam and Mugabe etc should not be tolerated. If we where more united and less divided, the world would be a much better place.

[Ged]

The only thing I would say about that is, there are plenty of other dictators around the world, Iran, N.Korea, East Timor and all that - It looks hollow and like it is just for oil if we pick and choose which dictators to remove, the ones where it's in our interests.

[A.D.W]

Don't you see that whoever's doing it is trying to give us a taste of what it must be like to be an Iraqi?

Most of us seem to think we should continue unthinkingly supporting or putting up with have a government that pointlessly messes up other people's lives because we do not like their ruler.

Terrorising us is the only way the only language some of us will ever understand to convey the enormity of the crime that has been perpetrated against the Iraqi people.

It is an attempt to make the unquestioning and the unthinking question and think, in my humble opinion.

Do the means justify the ends? If you are British and previously safe you might not think the same as an Iraqis who were previously relatively safer and who are now daily terrorised, maimed and killed by car bombs. I have no doubt that some of them would like us to see THEIR point of view, for a change.

Look carefully, and you will find "how would you like it if you had a taste of your own medicine?" messages contained in the cars of these terrorists.

I have no doubt one or the other: Labour and Tory - who both supported the war - will be voted in again at the next election. This is after all the glorious system of democracy that we are all so proud of. We would not change it for the world, would we?

[PhilipG]

Getting rid of Saddam wasn't the reason for invading Iraq, and it was just a lucky stroke that he was found (almost by accident) in a hole in the ground.
If they hadn't found him, we wouldn't be hearing this lame excuse about 'regime change'.

[AK1]

I agree, although I think it's more the U.S. who is interested in the oil, and military action is not an option with some countries such as N.Korea who have the means to retaliate.
I do think though that it's time for a change with what we are doing in Iraq. The military action worked in getting rid of Saddam and crippling his regime, but all this fighting is getting us nowhere anymore. I think a cease fire should be called and we should begin talks with some of the Iraqi groups.
I know that some of them are blatant terrorists who simply want to kill and obtain power, but some of them are genuinely misguided and have the belief that we are actually trying to take over and rule their country which is completely wrong.
These are the groups we should talk to and try to develop some sort of agreement where we both have a simple goal to make Iraq democratic and self sufficient and to get rid of the extremists which would be alot easier if we work together.
I am speaking from a purely British point of view and believe that the U.S shouldn't be involved anymore. They have a nack for making things worse and they are far less trustworthy than the U.K.

[snappel]

If they hadn't found him, we wouldn't be hearing this lame excuse about 'regime change'.

Whether he was found or not, he wouldn't be in power now, he'd still be hiding in a whole. So lame or not, the 'regime change' reason/excuse would still stand.

I doubt it's all about oil. The Middle East has about 20% of the World's oil or something doesn't it? Bearing in mind the shear cost and effort of repairing the facilities, getting the oil out and giving the Iraqis a payment, I shouldn't think it would be worth the billions spent on the war effort just for that. Besides which, I reckon your average Iraqi would benefit more from the oil being sold/extracted by the Yanks than when Saddam did it.

[ChrisGeorge]

Hi all

It's also a matter of the United States believing it can shape the future of the Middle East (as misguided as that might be) and of having a base of operations in the region. It's still unclear whether the U.S. will get permanent bases in Iraq out of their venture into that country, but there is a strong line of thought that the intervention in Iraq was partly done to have such bases. A partial U.S. withdrawal would likely leave American bases in Iraq, ostensibly to continue to train Iraqi military and police. It is probable that whether the world likes it or not, the U.S. will retain an interest in Iraq unless turfed out by a new strongman or a regional war.

Chris

[marie]

Hi all

It's also a matter of the United States believing it can shape the future of the Middle East (as misguided as that might be) and of having a base of operations in the region. It's still unclear whether the U.S. will get permanent bases in Iraq out of their venture into that country, but there is a strong line of thought that the intervention in Iraq was partly done to have such bases. A partial U.S. withdrawal would likely leave American bases in Iraq, ostensibly to continue to train Iraqi military and police. It is probable that whether the world likes it or not, the U.S. will retain an interest in Iraq unless turfed out by a new strongman or a regional war.

Chris

Chris, Do u know Fort Bliss in El Paso, Tx?

[ChrisGeorge]

Chris, Do u know Fort Bliss in El Paso, Tx?

Hi Marie

I don't know Fort Bliss but I have been around or on a number of other U.S. Army bases in the United States.

Chris

[Sloyne]

Unfortunately it's not that simple. He was a threat to Western democracy, WMDs or not.

Please explain how he threatened "Western democracy"? Thank in advance.

[Sloyne]

It is probable that whether the world likes it or not, the U.S. will retain an interest in Iraq unless turfed out by a new strongman or a regional war.

Initially, maybe, but I believe the Iraqi resistance will expel them regardless of a strongman or not. The Americans have become the most hated of the occupiers and even the most moderate Iraqi want them out. A look at BBC and Canadian TV news broadcasts shows the depth of feeling against the US occupiers by the "ordinary" Iraqis. US TV news broadcasts are highly sanitized and the average American are receiving a false picture. The US military are the most powerful on the planet, from 35,000 feet and a thousand miles at sea. Face to face with a highly motivated enemy on it's own turf, the GI is just another enemy soldier and not a superman.

[ChrisGeorge]

Initially, maybe, but I believe the Iraqi resistance will expel them regardless of a strongman or not. The Americans have become the most hated of the occupiers and even the most moderate Iraqi want them out. A look at BBC and Canadian TV news broadcasts shows the depth of feeling against the US occupiers by the "ordinary" Iraqis. US TV news broadcasts are highly sanitized and the average American are receiving a false picture. The US military are the most powerful on the planet, from 35,000 feet and a thousand miles at sea. Face to face with a highly motivated enemy on it's own turf, the GI is just another enemy soldier and not a superman.

Hi Sloyne

I agree that the average American is being misled as to the nature of the situation in Iraq. The American public has been fed the line by Bush and Co. that it is mainly a war against Al Queda and the people who attacked the World Trade Center. They are not being told that the U.S. is trapped in an unwinnable civil war. I also agree that there is a myth about the invincibility of the U.S. armed forces. In this situation, they can't win because they are fighting an undefined enemy in a hostile country.

Chris

[marie]

Hi Marie

I don't know Fort Bliss but I have been around or on a number of other U.S. Army bases in the United States.

Chris

My English is not good and it is difficult to explain the situation, if you do not know Fort Bliss.
When I visited for the first time Fort Bliss, El Paso, and thanks to a veteran familiar...
Aside the colony of City Juarez, hundreds of broken houses accumulated, without light, without water... to another side of the border, machines destroying new houses in Fort Bliss.
When I asked porqué, the response was: they need to spend the budget, in order that to the next year, they do not reduce it.
Till now we have been speaking about deads.
I now raise the money that the armies become exhausted. Money that is mine, yours and of all people, when I have not chosen to go to a war. Money that is stolen to other departments, education, health...

[ChrisGeorge]

Hi Marie

What you describe is true. I have been to El Paso but not Fort Bliss, and I agree the contrast between the poverty of Juarez and the prosperity of the United States is shocking. I passed over the border just for the experience of doing so (I was on a cross-country bus trip some twenty years ago) and the young people holding out styrofoam cups on the Mexican side proved an eye-opener to me, as well as the shacks visible on that side of the river. The military-industrial complex is one of the biggest industries in the United States, and when the budget calls for demolition of new housing that is what will happen.

Chris

[Sloyne]

I agree that the average American is being misled as to the nature of the situation in Iraq. The American public has been fed the line by Bush and Co. that it is mainly a war against Al Queda and the people who attacked the World Trade Center. They are not being told that the U.S. is trapped in an unwinnable civil war. I also agree that there is a myth about the invincibility of the U.S. armed forces. In this situation, they can't win because they are fighting an undefined enemy in a hostile country.

The blueprint for this war was drawn up in Korea and has been followed, with only slight modification, everywhere the US has invaded since Korea. The US seems to be a prisoner of it's own propaganda when it comes to military action. An often used, but failed, tactic is that of pacification and the British experience in Malaya is often held up as a shining example of this tactic, forgetting of course that the British were fighting Chinese communist "insurgents" and not native Malayans. The majority of the native population in Malaya, Muslims, where as averse to communism, no matter what stripe, as were the British capitalists. This, and this fact alone, led to the success of the pacification policy.

US foreign policy has been, for the most part, a disaster ever since the Monroe Doctrine declaration. The only thing American foreign policy seems to accomplish is the fostering and festering of long term hatred of that country and, by extension, it's citizens. Who would blame Syrians, Lebanese, Sudanese, Saudis, etc hating Americans. It is the US that keeps despotic dictators, like the Saudi Royal family, in power and bombs them from 30,000 feet and sends cruise missiles from a thousand miles at sea. And when they do happen to dislodge a dictator, like the Iranians did the Shah in 1948, the US CIA returns him to the throne to continue his despotic rule. The same can be said for the countries of the Caribbean, Central and South America. The US kept despotic criminals in power for the sake of the investments of United Fruit, IT&T and ALCOA. They, the US, are doing the same in the Middle East for Israel, Exxon-Mobil, Texaco et al. Who was it who said; "What you shall sow, so shall you reap"?