Re: Shouldn't we go back into Iraq
posted at 6/23/2014 7:03 PM EDT
In response to MattyScornD's comment:
In response to DirtyWaterLover's comment:
I've been thinking about this. Aren't we as a nation responsible for the situation in Iraq? Some will blame W and company for going into the Middle East to begin with. Others will blame Obama for not waving a magic wand and turning Iraq into a peaceful nation.
But regardless of which President made mistakes, didn't we as a nation cause it?
And if so, don't we have a responsibility to fix it? Not sure what fixing it involves, but we caused the problem. We broke it and then applied a halfassed patch that no one thought would hold. The patch that we created couldn't fix the problem we created.
Of course the challenge is finding a realistic objective that doesn't end up causing WW III. That whole area is a tinder box.
So maybe the solution is dividing up Iraq into 3 pieces. The Saudis, Iranians, Turks, and of couse the Kurds, Sunnis and Shiites in Iraq all have to be at the bargaining table. But how do you negotiate with religious fanatics? Christian fanatics are bad - but Islamic fanatics are impossible.
What a mess - and all in the name of increased profits for American Oil Companies - because none of that oil is coming to America.
What makes anyone - much less us - think we can even "fix it" in the first place...??
We're horrible at this nation-building stuff. The Dems are terrible at it, and the Repubs are even worse. Short-term humanitarian work? Just barely. Anything more is a recipe for disaster.
We pretty much destroy everything we touch, and we cause more damage doing the 'right thing' than if we had just bombed the bejesus out of them.
$2 trillion and counting. It costs a whole lot of money to show how badly we can mess up another country.
Because we should have to pay for our bad decisions. Because we shouldn't be allowed to topple governments for no reason, make a mess of it and then walk away. We've been doing it for 60 years. Look at the Congo - totally our fault (for the righties out there, we toppled the democratically elected Government and installed a brutal dictator who used to sell the food aid received from the UN in order to build mansions in Europe).
Central American is a similar issue. We had a policy of political destabilization in Central America. We supported dictators who brutalized the people and pocketed money instead of trying to develop the country. 60 years later and we are still acting like the world is ours to do with what we want. It is so bad in central America that parents are sending thier young children to the US unaccompanied. How bad do things have to be that you send you children off with strangers in search of a better life?
But lets not focus on that stuff. Lets focus on how religion (Christianinty) is somehow under attack because gays are getting married and poor people have to work on Thanksgiving. The War on Christianity campaign seems to be thought up by the same people who are saying the Government is going to take your guns away.
And W didn't say we had to invade Iraq because they had WMDs. W said we had to topple W because Iraq had WMDs and Saddam was a threat to use them against us here in the US, at least that was the implication. We had to prevent Saddam from launching a 9/11-like attack but with nukes against the US.
But even if Saddam had WMDs, he was never a threat to use them against the US. He might use them against Iran or maybe Israel, but not against the US.
There hasn't been a foreign policy move as stupid as invading Iraq since Austria-Hungary thought invading the Balkans was a good idea.