Is it time to pull out of Iraq? - Page 2

sarnie boy · 23-06-2004, 20:48

if u ask me with iraq its a lose-lose situation because if we do pull out then all those casulties would have been for no reason and if we dont pull out then then there will b a resistance which could kill

tonygillis · 24-06-2004, 04:18

I think they should stay until they finished what they started... Hopefully no more than 2 years will be takes to rebuild Iraq... I mean, America should "help their own" before Iraq... heh, if thats what you would call it... But yeah, too many casualties for straightening out something that could have been left alone...

Darby · 24-06-2004, 07:34

We have become embroiled in a desperate situation in Iraq. On one hand we must try to stabilize the Middle East and minimise Al-Q'aida. On the other hand we are fighting to prevent a worse situation evolving.

The real problem is one of Energy (in other words Oil), and who will control its availability - Al-Q'aida (the terrorists) or the West (I include Japan and China in this as they need more and more energy).
The situation could be alleviated if Dubbya and Tony B-liar had concentrated on removing the Wests dependency on oil by developing a "new" energy source. Hydrogen, Water or something more efficient and renewable. The money spent on the Iraq "thing" (it's not a conventional war), should have been diverted to developing this "new" energy source. At a stroke, the dependency on the Middle East would disappear, and Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, The Gulf States, Iraq and Iran would be marginalised and revert to their traditional ways (whatever they were). The terrorists would then not have a base with which to export their hatred and poison, and neither would they have the money and wherewithall to operate. Mind you, the hatred would remain, especially in those Western countries which have a large Islamic population, but they could not blame the west for all their ills and explotation of their natural resources.

All in all its a tricky decision to make. Stay, pull-out, don't know!! Stalwart, Faint heart, or Ostrich?
None of them would resolve the situation. You have to thank Saddam, Osama Bin-Liner, and the Islamic Fanatics for the position we are in.
My son shall shortly be in Iraq, so I have a vested interest, so to speak. But I still can't see any resolving of the situation except Stay there and do the job seems to be the only sensible way, but I'm afraid of the Politicians and the UN making an even bigger mess!!

JohnW · 06-07-2004, 21:10

Well Darby, I hope your son returns safely in the not too distant future. I'm sure you will have a few sleepless nights worrying about him while he is there.

Perran · 06-07-2004, 23:49

The majority of Iraqis are happy to be rid of Saddam but are impatient for self rule. Many groups are fighting their corner but only 1 or 2 are using violence.
The main source of violence is coming from Al Quaeda sympathists who are trying to destablise the country for their own ends. For them it has nothing to do with Iraq just the fight against the western nations.

I think one of the main problems we face is the 24 hr press on which these people feed. If you notice kidnappings have increased 10 fold as groups fight for their minute of infamy and their faces splashed across every page and internet news site. If these were not reported or no fuss made they would tale off. It reminds me of a program a few years ago which reported on a new craze in Sth Africa called car jacking. It was an in depth report and stated that it was not common in the UK with under 10 reported in the few months prior to the program. Surprisingly within days of the program going out there had been numerous reports of it happening here. Wonder why? could be the i wish id thought of that!

I think the press has an awful lot to answer for and in some situations definately need to be gagged.

Ceejache · 07-07-2004, 07:14

I understand your concern Perran but to start gagging the press is a dangerous thing to do. If a precedent is set then where will this news blackout end? Who will be responsible for blocking news such as this - will they be able to be trusted to edit without putting any spin on the topic? (would that be possible at all?)

Its a catch-22 really as I agree with you that the coverage of these kidnappings provokes further similar scenarios, yet the press have a right and duty to report - as we have to be informed.

In Iraq yesterday 6 people were killed in an explosion at an Iraqi funeral.....these are the sort of fundamental, extremist savages that we are dealing with here. Their contempt for human life (even that for their 'own') is beyond belief.

JohnW · 07-07-2004, 10:54

I agree with Ceejache, we cannot gag the press, it would impose on our, and their, fundamental rights. On the other hand, the press itself needs to be far more responsible in its reporting. I am aware that they have to make a profit in order to remain viable, we certainly do not want them all to go bust and be left with no media. However, they seem to be at the point where they are willing to sacrifice truth and employ sensationalism in support of their profit and loss account. They need to rethink their mission statement and endeavour to get the truth to the people without embellishing and 'glamourising', for want of a better word, the harsh realities of bad situations such as we are presently witnessing in Iraq and other parts of this troubled world of ours.

Perran · 07-07-2004, 23:05

I understand that we need both freedom of speech and of press but feel that the commercial side of it has overtaken the moral. Can you imagine if in 1944 the press had been as open as it is now? Our troops are still at risk as is national security. I can imagine the headlines in 1944 "Rumours of troop build up continue" "Normandy possible invasion point" "Government denies build up, we demand the truth!" " Germans expect attack in north"etc etc etc. Good old John Snow would be covering every possible attack point along with step by step breakdown of our equipment and the possibilities of failure, success and stalemate. All this presented in lovely 3D!

You get the picture. I just think that sometimes it is better not to know in the interests of us all.

Ceejache · 08-07-2004, 08:03

I was thinking of the very same scenario as t'other side of the coin as well Perran! In such cases, where the media are giving information concerning a forthcoming clandestine operation therefore putting our soldiers lives in great danger, then a gag is only fair in the interests of national security and thousands of lives.

On the flip side reporting on an event that has happened is different (although you can argue that by giving coverage you are putting other potential hostages in danger). I agree with you on that point, but if what was happening in the middle east (Iraq) wasn't reported then we would think that everything was fine and dandy with no potential contractors aware of the grave danger they would be putting themselves in.

wayneyboy1942 · 22-03-2005, 00:25

We are in Iraq weather you agree or not with the war,we can't just leave the people of Iraq to their fate, and when we leave, and I hope it's as soon as possible,the people will have the government they want and peace,lets hope our lads come home safe, I'm proud of them!

Bazf · 22-03-2005, 13:31

My son returned from Irac 2 months ago after his tour and he said that the Iraqies hate all the killing and violence but feel helpless to stop it, he said if you talk to the civies at the airbase they hated the foreigners, not the Brits and Americans, the Arabs. They said where were the Arabs when Saddam was in power, why do they kill Iraqies? but there main gripe seems to be the promises that havent been fulfilled especially the end to Violence. My son said it reminded him of n.Ireland.

garinda · 22-03-2005, 17:41

We should never have entered into this war. British boold should not have been shed. This was all to do with oil and money.
lf the US/British alliance are going to police the world to fight tyranical dictatorships there are far more worthy battles to fight, but then again they aren't strategically placed in the middle of the worlds biggest oil producing area.
Straw even shook Mugabes hand, well 'they' all look alike, easy mistake to make!

Busman747 · 23-03-2005, 00:05

Quote:
Originally Posted by KIPAX
We (UK) stuck our noses in where it wasn't wanted.. What right had we (UK) to go attack another country that had done nothing to us (UK)... Because they might have done somehting to us? DUH!

Now we will suffer the consequences.

Sorry but I ahve a very simplistic view on life

Posted by Tealeaf...
How simple can you get? Because politicians - and the majority of public opinion - said they were not interested in confronting Nazi Germany which had done us no harm, although it had invaded a "country far away of which we know little" (Neville Chamberlain). They ultimately paid the price of ignoring Hitler and hoping he'd go away.

If history teaches us any lesson, it is that history teaches us nowt. If anyone seriously thinks here that the problems of the Middle East (Dictatorship & Islamic fanatisism) can be addressed by ignoring them and appeasing it's players, then you're in cloud cuckoo land.

"Why bother? You have spoken now.. Put everyone in there place and told them whats what.. While the rest of us where having a debate you wade in telling us how it is.. Not how you think it is or your opinion on anyhting.. just wade in shouting the odds."

I am in total agreement tealeaf, There may be an underlying factor concocted by the USA and UK, but at the end of the day, the more rebellious countries in the Middle East are becoming a REAL threat to the Western world. If it wasn't us that have intervened it would be the Chinese or one of the Arab countries themselves. If we hadn't stopped Saddam when he invaded Kuwait it was accepted by all that his next "conquest" would have been Saudi Arabia! Where would it have stopped?

One of the latest fads are the "conspiracy theories" Some may be true ...but many people now look for obscure reasons to reject ANYTHING said by government bodies and to come up with far-fetched ideas that are now being accepted as truth, one such example is whether the USA actually landed on the moon...but that should be another thread

Sarcasm has no place on this forum Kipax, you stated that you have a "simplistic" view which is what inspired Tealeaf to start his thread with the comment "How simple can you get?"

The idea of a forum is that each individual should be able to voice their opinion whether it is considered right or wrong.....

I PERSONALLY feel that I am right and you are wrong, but I am willing to listen to you!

WillowTheWhisp · 23-03-2005, 01:28

My first thoughts are that I'm sure I really don't know enough about the whole situation to have a valid opinion. There must be many facts that we are not aware of. I was fairly disgusted with the whole WMD thing and not least of all the death of Dr. Kelly. Unfortunately that reason/excuse or whatever has proved to be a stumbling block for most people when nothing was ever found.

It's too easy to say that it's all about oil. Maybe the first gulf war was more about oil but I don't think this is. This has got a lot to do with fear as well. Perhaps it would have been better if Saddam had been finished off the first time round, but he wasn't.

Any fundamentalist group or movement can be scary and I do feel that there is a real threat to the rest of the world. As Tealeaf said if everyone had sat back and done nothing when Hitler invaded Poland we'd probably all be speaking German today. I don't think we can just ignore this problem and hope it will go away. Mind you, we wouldn't have the "gypsies/travellers" problems but would we really want a Nazi solution to them?

I don't think we can afford to have an "I'm alright Jack" attitude these days. It's too small a world to think that what happens in one area doesn't affect the rest of us.

For Darby and anyone else with loved ones out there it must be a difficult time. Let us hope they return home safely.

chav1 · 23-03-2005, 04:41

i wish our govenment would put as much effort in removing terrorists from the uk as it does removing them from iraq

sure we need to fight terrorism but we got a whole load of terrorists here in the uk as well that need sorting out like that guy with hooks for hands he cant be deported coz brusseld says so

on the subject of iraq we are basicly pi$$ing into the wind and the simple reason why is that our soldiers have to fight according to the laws of war and human rights where as the terrorists dont give a damn and never get caught

the only way to fight terrorists is to play them at their own game and torture them in whatever barbaric ways are needed to get information from them

they are quite willing to chop of heads so lets treat them like they deserve and get dirty