Ten Reasons to Leave Iraq Now (2 Viewers)

[Born2baplacebo]

10. The U.S. military has absolutely no right, whether legal or moral, to be killing people who live in Iraq. It has no right to even be in Iraq. Why is this? Because neither the Iraqi government nor the Iraqi people ever attacked the United States. This fact makes the war in Iraq an optional one, not a necessary one.
To reiterate what should be obvious, the fact that the U.S. was attacked in 2001 does not give this country the right to attack and kill people who had nothing to do with those crimes. It is morally acceptable to go after criminals, but it is a crime to kill their families, their friends, their neighbors, or anyone else not criminally complicit.
9. Both political parties have pursued a foreign policy of aggression for decades, and where has that gotten us?
Our military is based in over 120 countries around the world. The U.S. government has spent billions and billions of dollars of our tax money to prop up dictators and despotic regimes. It has armed people such as Osama bin Laden and the "freedom fighters" in Afghanistan, Saddam Hussein, and Manuel Noriega, only to use military force to oust them later on. This type of foreign policy has driven people all over the world to hate us. Don't we have enough enemies yet? Isn't it time to say enough is enough?
8. Since this war began back in 1991, millions of people have been driven from their homes, injured, or killed. Considering this fact, I cannot be convinced that the Iraqi people are better off in any way.
7. In a free country, aggressive war should never be used as a tool of foreign policy. Using force to impose what American politicians consider to be a proper government for Iraq violates every principle of freedom which this country is supposed to stand for. This is not freedom for Iraqis
6. No one can convince me that kindness and charity are the primary motives in a war where hundreds of billions of dollars are forcibly redistributed from American citizens to the military-industrial complex; especially the weapons-manufacturers. Maybe something else motivates the war-makers. Could it be greed?
5. Like virtually every war, this war is being funded through the coercive method of taxation. The wealth of the American people is being forcibly transferred to the government and their corporate partners; the merchants of death. Just considering this one point, the war in Iraq is just as immoral and illegal as stealing from one person to give to another.
On top of this, taxation, deficit-spending, and the printing of money gives the government an almost unlimited source of funding. Thus, there is no incentive for the government to spend the money wisely, because it can always get more - from us. Conversely, the access to such vast wealth is actually an incentive to continue the war perpetually. The ability to grow in wealth and power is something that not many politicians have had the strength to resist throughout history. American politicians are no different.
4. The Iraq War is the polar opposite of any proper concept of self-defense. The United States is the aggressor and Iraq is the defender; plain and simple. This fact brings up some very difficult moral and legal issues for everyone involved. Thomas Paine may have summed it up best:

"Not all the treasures of the world, so far as I believe, could have induced me to support an offensive war, for I think it murder."
​

3. We fought in Vietnam to stop the "domino effect" of communism, but when the communists took over, the world didn't come to an end. We "saved" Kuwait from an evil dictator, but it's still run by a family dynasty that has no interest in liberty for the people. We waged war on Afghanistan to capture Osama bin Laden. Oddly, rights violations are still rampant and Afghani opium production has soared since the invasion. And then, of course, we have all the "good" done in Iraq.
This foreign policy of aggression and intervention, which we have seen grow in preeminence over the last century, just doesn't work. The politicians promise us peace; they promise us security; they promise us anything to get us to go along with their policies, but what happens? In virtually every situation, the intervention totally fails, or the "enemy" is replaced by another despotic regime. The U.S. government has caused chaos in Iraq, and the time for that to come to an end is now.
2. You don't bring freedom to people by waging war on their cities and towns, and you don't protect innocent people by killing innocent people. It is a crime to aggressively take the life of another person. There is no murder of innocent people that can be justified by claiming that it was necessary for the "greater good."
If you consider that to be the right way of handling the problems in Iraq, you more closely resemble Joseph Stalin's way of thinking than that of liberty-lovers like Patrick Henry and Thomas Paine.
And the No. 1 reason to get the U.S. out of Iraq...
1. The warfare state is, hands down, the greatest threat to liberty. In war, the government always claims the need for massive power, and it uses war as an excuse to expand its control over our lives in every way possible.

http://www.counterbias.com/888.html

Couldn't have put it better myself.

 

[banco55]

As soon as the US leaves those savages will start killing each other by the tens of thousands.

 

[jb_nc]

lol pt. 8 acts like the US never should have started the gulf war, lol

 

[bshoc]

lol someone throw this leftie in a gulag

 

[mr_brightside]

tl;dr

 

[loquasagacious]

Response:
10: what defines a right to be there? My recollection is that US forces are currently operating under a UN mandate. Want a different definition of right? How is your definition of 'fair' any more legitimate than mine: might=might???
9: Leaving now would create more new enemies around the world, alienate existing allies and embolden existing enemies.
8: This is a case for not going in not a case for leaving. Imagine for a moment what would happen if the US withdrew?
7: Freedom to pursue a foreign policy of its own choosing is among the rights fought for by founding fathers. Americans hold the freedom to vote, they don't support foreign policy then don't vote for it.
6: Have you considered that the motive could be a geopolitical power-play? And also see-above americans have the freedom to vote hence they are choosingp to redistribute their money in that way.
5: Has this guy forgotten voting? He certainly has no notion of economics - printing money isn't how it works, excessive taxation will bring wrack and ruin.
4: Thats a value call. I believe that offensive war is justified by cost v benefit and its at least as valid as your stance.
3: This point is a rehash of 9.
2: When push comes to shove, shove hard. Again rehashes 4.
1: This point relates to the war on terror not specifically iraq. And again its a value laden decision because at some point you must weigh liberties against security they are competiting concerns.

 

[bshoc]

It wasn't the lefties who were thrown in the gulag. It was their enemies.

You forget that once lefties take control everyone is indoctrinated to be a leftie anyway, alot of lefties were thrown into gulags too, which is great because they could experience the end result of their own beliefs, nice irony there I think.

 

[bshoc]

PS: The decision to stay in Iraq (or withdraw) isn't a left/right issue. Nationalists don't like troops being over there.

No-one likes troops being over there, me included, but you have to worry for the sanity of a person who wrote what was posted in the OP. Nobody in their right mind would pull troops out of Iraq, it would be Afghanistan*20 and Iran is right next door.

George Bush is a class of his own. Staying in Iraq isn't a "right wing" objective. Just in case you were mistakenly hating this person because you thought they were left wing

I dislike all left wingers, anything they or their ideas touch turn to turd, the economy, social fabric, morality, human life, you really dont have to go far down the road of history, so lets not revisit Castros Cuba or Stalinist Russia ok?

And the poster is a leftist, you can always tell.

and a threat to your macho, tough, right winger mindset which assumes that they are in Iraq to punish "muslims", yet ignore the fact that the supposedly right wing government is letting in record numbers of them without you knowing.

I don't try to be either macho or overtly right wing, I just believe that people should be informed of when they say something stupid, since when is Iraq about punishing muslims? Iraq was always about two things:

1. Dethroning Saddam and setting up a more favorable government.
2. Giving a nice scare to all other countries in the region to self-reform or face the same fate.

They have been succesfull to varying degrees, and are a neo-conservative brainchild, an ideology which if you didn't know already, derives from a left wing philosophy.

People like you always end up losing anyway. You remind me of the tough general in the Vietnam war who ordered a complete village be leveled in the interests of stamping out 'communists'. Tough, heavy handed tactics exerted upon anyone tend to back fire. They lost Vietnam, they will lose Iraq. Your imagined sense of power in this war is false in the extreme. You have no power.

Nobody lost Vietnam idiot, by the numbers the US could have torn the Vietnamese army to shreds eventually, but political climate was shifting and the sacrifice necessary was no longer becoming politically expedient.

Iraq cannot be compared to Vietnam, in Vietnam the war was mainly against military and paramilitary units, not roadside bombs and insurgents.

 

[Serius]

PS: The decision to stay in Iraq (or withdraw) isn't a left/right issue. Nationalists don't like troops being over there.

George Bush is a class of his own. Staying in Iraq isn't a "right wing" objective. Just in case you were mistakenly hating this person because you thought they were left wing and a threat to your macho, tough, right winger mindset which assumes that they are in Iraq to punish "muslims", yet ignore the fact that the supposedly right wing government is letting in record numbers of them without you knowing.

People like you always end up losing anyway. You remind me of the tough general in the Vietnam war who ordered a complete village be leveled in the interests of stamping out 'communists'. Tough, heavy handed tactics exerted upon anyone tend to back fire. They lost Vietnam, they will lose Iraq. Your imagined sense of power in this war is false in the extreme. You have no power.

Vietnam was a whole different situation, a line was drawn and political armed forces were fighting each other. It wasnt like the US walked all over the country and owned it like in Iraq, at best they managed the maintain that line and when they left the south got steamrolled. It was a good demonstration of the home team advantage.

My opinion is we are currently involved in a global war of a nature never seen before. It isnt quite a clash of civilisations because no civilisation can stand up to US might, but its more a subversive push by islamic crazies and a big bulge style push back by the US. Seen as we arent muslims and we like freedom ofcourse we support USA. Is the war about oil? maybe its a small part of it but so what? oil is a resource and a dwindling one at that, we need it, for now and to secure stable oil sources for the future and our military is more powerful. Take the oil if you need it.

 

[onebytwo]

Iraq was always about two things:
1. Dethroning Saddam and setting up a more favorable government.
2. Giving a nice scare to all other countries in the region to self-reform or face the same fate.

rubbish.
the two reasons were:
1. saddam supported terrorism and along with his WMD posed an "imminent" threat to global peace
2. see reason 1.
funny how the hot issue of WMDs couldnt find its way into your reasoning - too bad now that their absence makes all you neocon fools look even more retarded - youre full of shit

 

[bazookajoe]

10. The U.S. military has absolutely no right, whether legal or moral, to be killing people who live in Iraq. It has no right to even be in Iraq. Why is this? Because neither the Iraqi government nor the Iraqi people ever attacked the United States. This fact makes the war in Iraq an optional one, not a necessary one.

So according to this logic, no other country should have revoked against Germany's invasion of Poland which started WWII. Germany never attacked Great Britain or France right? What gives them the right to attack Germany?

 

[bazookajoe]

8. Since this war began back in 1991, millions of people have been driven from their homes, injured, or killed. Considering this fact, I cannot be convinced that the Iraqi people are better off in any way.

Since cars were first introduced to the world, hundreds of thousands of people have been injured and killed. Considering this fact, I cannot be convinced that cars benefit society.

 

[onebytwo]

Since cars were first introduced to the world, hundreds of thousands of people have been injured and killed. Considering this fact, I cannot be convinced that cars benefit society.

the millions of people that still drive cars disagree with you

 

[withoutaface]

the millions of people that still drive cars disagree with you

You mean the same millions of people who power those cars from the oil which can only be secured if Iraq is invaded, cf the illuminati conspiracy?

 

[sam04u]

I can give you 10 better reasons.


1. It's illegal.
2. It has multiplied the amount of Islamic extremists.
3. It costed almost a trillion dollars? (not sure of the exact figure)
4. About 1 million Iraqi's have died as a result, and that figure will only increase with the U.S, Australian and British presence.
5. It has increased Anti-West sentiment throughout the entire world.
6. It has propogated "Anti-Islam" policies of the west. (Which we have now become apart of as Australians.)
7. It alienates the "Western" countries from the rest of the world. (New Axis of evil? U.S, Britain and Australia?)
8. It has caused, and continually causes internal tension. (All three of the leaders involved in the war will lose their government. As the war was built on lies and deceit. Britains Labour party, Australias Liberal Party and the U.S's Republican party, all having the lowest approval rates in decades.)
9. It has caused racial tensions and terrorist attacks within the west, making the world less safe. (Cronulla Riots, London Bombings, Etc, etc.)
10. It is an unjust and inhumane war. It has raised international tensions and could possibly be one of the leading factors to a nuclear war.

 

[banco55]

I can give you 10 better reasons.

4. About 1 million Iraqi's have died as a result, and that figure will only increase with the U.S, Australian and British presence.
.

No way it's a million. If the US left things would be a lot worse. You think the Sunnis/Shiites will kiss and make up after the US leaves?

 

[CharlieB]

I can give you 10 better reasons.


1. It's illegal.
2. It has multiplied the amount of Islamic extremists.
3. It costed almost a trillion dollars? (not sure of the exact figure)
4. About 1 million Iraqi's have died as a result, and that figure will only increase with the U.S, Australian and British presence.
5. It has increased Anti-West sentiment throughout the entire world.
6. It has propogated "Anti-Islam" policies of the west. (Which we have now become apart of as Australians.)
7. It alienates the "Western" countries from the rest of the world. (New Axis of evil? U.S, Britain and Australia?)
8. It has caused, and continually causes internal tension. (All three of the leaders involved in the war will lose their government. As the war was built on lies and deceit. Britains Labour party, Australias Liberal Party and the U.S's Republican party, all having the lowest approval rates in decades.)
9. It has caused racial tensions and terrorist attacks within the west, making the world less safe. (Cronulla Riots, London Bombings, Etc, etc.)
10. It is an unjust and inhumane war. It has raised international tensions and could possibly be one of the leading factors to a nuclear war.

exactly what are these 'anti-islam' policies?

 

[jb_nc]

exactly what are these 'anti-islam' policies?

man they're super secret you have to be usama bin-laden or gorege bush to know

 

[bshoc]

rubbish.
the two reasons were:
1. saddam supported terrorism and along with his WMD posed an "imminent" threat to global peace
2. see reason 1.
funny how the hot issue of WMDs couldnt find its way into your reasoning - too bad now that their absence makes all you neocon fools look even more retarded - youre full of shit

I never believed the WMD's line, and neither did the Bush administration probably, it was a means to an end, and it was one dot point in a long list of dot point arguments, some of which could have been considered unverified.

 

[bshoc]

I can give you 10 better reasons.

1. It's illegal.

How? Whose law? Its entirely legal under the UN resolutions 660, 678, 687 and 1441 if you're talking about international law, what other law is there?

Note that when banner waving dickwad lefties talk about illegality, its only that illegality which exists in their head, the invasion may have been rushed, but it was entirely legal.

http://www.worldpress.org/specials/iraq/unscr1441.htm

. It has multiplied the amount of Islamic extremists.

It has stirred up the bee hive, the bees were always there, now they're just out of the hive, and easier to swat.

3. It costed almost a trillion dollars? (not sure of the exact figure)

Nothing the western economy cant handle, our government is raking in record a surplus ..

all the "costed" lol

4. About 1 million Iraqi's have died as a result, and that figure will only increase with the U.S, Australian and British presence.

And most of them were not killed by the the US, the coalition is the only thing protecting most Iraqis not part of a militia from the insurgents weapons, casualties will only increase if that force leaves.

5. It has increased Anti-West sentiment throughout the entire world.

Mind you, thats alot worse for the people whose sentiment became more anti-western, not so much the west itself. The West is the apex of human civilization and the middle east is little more than a backwater, all of that sentiment, mainly fueled by jealousy, existed before and is nothing new.

6. It has propogated "Anti-Islam" policies of the west. (Which we have now become apart of as Australians.)

What?

The fact that isn't true is actually a bad thing in my opinion, if George Bush really wants to wipe out a good deal of evil from the world, wipe out Islam.

7. It alienates the "Western" countries from the rest of the world. (New Axis of evil? U.S, Britain and Australia?)

Our previously great friendship with North Korea and Syria will not be missed.

8. It has caused, and continually causes internal tension. (All three of the leaders involved in the war will lose their government. As the war was built on lies and deceit. Britains Labour party, Australias Liberal Party and the U.S's Republican party, all having the lowest approval rates in decades.)

And yet they're all still in power, the only internal tension it has caused is to the moron lefties and muslim retards like yourself who should not be in a country whose values they neither understand or believe in. All lefties back to cuba, and you back to whatever islamic craphole you came from.

9. It has caused racial tensions and terrorist attacks within the west, making the world less safe. (Cronulla Riots, London Bombings, Etc, etc.)

It was started by a muslim terrorist attack, you have no right to whine.

10. It is an unjust and inhumane war. It has raised international tensions and could possibly be one of the leading factors to a nuclear war.

You ran out of points after 4, stop repeating yourself.