War in Iraq, is there a point?

I'm against the war in Iraq. For many reasons. But mostly, because I honestly don't know what the war is for, what it's about. I mean, I get all sorts of rationalizations, but never any concreat motive.Can anyone explain to me what the war is about, and why is it worthwile to fight?

But aren't the majority of fighters in Iraq former regime members, groups vieing for power, and disgruntled citizens?Last I checked terrorists are coming into Iraq precisely because of our presense, they weren't there before. And how on earth does this effect the presence of terrorists in phillipenes, africa, and other nations were ranks are swelling?Such an action seems to be making more terrorists than eliminating them.

Say the war is over, they get a democratic govt. we pull out. All's done.What are the effects of this? How will terrorism be affected?What's to keep Iraq from being another empovrished failed state like every other country the US has attempted to "nation build". Such failed states still harbor terrorists.So, what's the point?

Well, WWI was a mess. Another dumb ass war IMHO But I understand your point, and I agree. I don't think we went to "war for oil" or that we wen't to war for "democracy", I think that's all BS. I think we are there because some people really belive this is a good thing.I don't for a second deny ecomomic intrests playing a role, but I think there is more an ideological interest driving the whole thing. So ya.... anyway....Why do we think Iraq in particular will help the terrorist sittuation?Affghanistan didn't stop it, and there are still terrorists there. Bombings and attacks still go on. I just don't see what sort of change we are effecting by being in Iraq.

Yes, but Germany and Japan are a different case. They were highly developed countries with good education, good infrastructure, and a wealthy populace. Iraq falls more in line with our pathetic showings in South america, where dictator, after corupt govt., after CIA hit squad, after dictator, basically left nothing but poor nations harboring.... *drum roll*.... terrorists. I agree, if a non-corrupt govournment were to arise, and the constiturion were to be adopted as written, I would have noting but shinning hopes for the endveor. But unfortunetly the constitution has more than signifficant opptosition, and from the looks of it consessions to sharia are going to be made.Not to mention infighting among the shia, kurds and others. It's beginning to look like Laurence of Arabia. I don't think that just because of a constitution you can expect a country (that has been bombed back to the stone-age) to just pick up the pieces and succed. Especially a country that dosn't want you there.Japan and Germany signed surrenders and welcomed us to their country to help them rebuild. There was no significant resistance. We cannot say the same for Iraq.

The question isn't if Saddam was a good guy, or that he deserved to be in power. The question is why him? And why his country?There are plenty of power hungry dictators in terror statse, why Saddam? I disagree with that figure, though I don't think they are the majority. The majority of iraqies are opposed to the occupation however. And there is a sizable insurgency. I could dig up figures if you want, but I'm sure that your aware that 0.001% is hyperbole. Because the inssurgency isn't a cohessive unit. From all reports it's like any brewing civil war. A bunch of dissatisfied factions who all have different agendas all at each others throats. One thing is for sure, ALL of them want to kill us.

This is a reply to both of Tals replies. And some general info. on the subject. I'm not gonna do a point by point reply, I'm posting these as facts, so they should speak for themselves and enlighten the rest of this discussion.Iraqi opposition - Wikipedia(post-occupation)Composition of the Opposition: This is some good info from the Analyssis and Polls section in the same article: Some numbers of insurgents: Notice that these numbers account for "hardened fighters", this does not account for their supporters, and supporting organizations. The article mentions at least 40 individual guerilla groups, and over a 50% percent popular support for them. It would be interesting to see how these numbers compare to the Viet Cong in Vietnam, I couldn't find any data. If anyone wants to give it a go taht would be cool.The Iraq Constitution.Tal says: Well, we already know that Iraq has missed it's deadline for a constitution about 3 times now. Lets look at some of the reasons it's not being rattified:http://ap.washingtontimes.com/dynamic/stories/I/IRAQ?SITE... This is not a minor point. It is a fundamental point that is disagreed on by all parties involved. Another report elaborates on this issue. Essentially many folks wan't Sharia law written into the constitution.Newsday | Long Island's & NYC's News Source - Newsday It probably would be pretty short I will do some more research latter, Im digging up articles on the reconstruction as well as some more statistics. etc. etc.My hope is that this data will lead to a productive conversation and not just a shouting match, I would love to understand why this war is seen as a necessity.ABE: I'm at work, and I noticed that this little post is turnning into quite a research project. So I will get back to it latter. If anyone else want's to dig up some relevant figures. Please do.I would like the figures to be from a variety of sources (not just ones supporting your particular view on the subject). I wan't plain ol'figures.This message has been edited by Yaro, 08-22-2005 02:07 PM

Hey FairWittness, do you have any stats, links, articles and such to back up your claims?Im putting together some material to post later on today (maybe tomorow time permiting). I'm really interested in cutting thrugh the propaghanda, and unearthing the motivations, efficacy, and "rightness" of the war. (If such a thing can ever be said about a war)

Hey FairWitness,You made some claims, I think they sound compelling. I would love to know if they are true. If you could provide material with which to support them, I think it would be benificial for all of us to discuss it openly and come to some conclusions about it.This is not a bad thing, ideas, facts, and so on are meant to be picked appart and explored. Rejected, or accepted on their merits. The truth stands on it's own dispite scruteny.I have already learned quite a few things from the data Tal posted and am revising some of my views. I'm perfectly willing to accept new data and change my mind, are you?

This is not the goal of this forum, or this discussion. I am truely interested in the data concerning the war and it's justification. I DON'T UNDERSTAND.From what I currently know, I disagree with the war. However, I feel there is so much propaghanda being tossed around by both sides of the issue that it is hard to understand what is going on and why it is happening.I wan't to discuss the data, articles, etc. That is available. I think it would be wonderfull if you could contribut to this thread by providing some. Tal is pro-war, he has provided some good data. I'm in the process of compiling relvant info.Are you open to discussing your views?

Hey shraf, I totally agree with you. But in the name of fairness, do you think you could cite articles and relevant sources?

Crap, this is not where I wanted this thread to go!This is not ment to be a thread with people shouting past each other!Further, the question isn't weather Saddam was a bad guy, if the US is bad, etc.The focus is simple, WHAT IS THE POINT OF THE WAR?Can anyone give a straight answer and back it up?

I'm sorry I started this thread. I should have known it would have degenerated into name calling.Can you so called right-wing people realize that we are all americans and just because someone on the so called left-wing dosn't agree with you, it dosn't mean they hate the US, or are traitors, or some other idiotic crap.It pisses me off to hear people on either side treating the other side like dirt just cuz they don't hold the same views. This jingoistic America first crap has to go.I think the words of Mark Twain sumed it up best (heck, which of his words don't):"Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it."

Monk,While I have problems with some points in the article, it clearly expresses one side of the story. I really appreciate this post. This is the sort of thing I would like to see discussed on this thread.Thank you

This kinda crap.It's the underlying assumptionn that the guy on the other side of the argument is some sort of Anti-American communist hippy who needs "to have sense shaken into them".or: The underlying assumption that people on the left are ruining this country. Or some other unsoported, ideological bull crap.This is not what this thread was supposed to be about. It was supposed to be about both sides laying out why the war was necessary, why it has a point?Don't you think that people on both sides of the issue has thought long and hard about what this war is about?I like some of the articles Tal and Monk have posted. I think they paint a good portrait of the conservative viewpoint. Do I agree, no. But I also don't think that the right are a bunch of brain dead idiots "out to basterdize our institutions" or some other idiocy.