Declare War on Iraq

01-24-2010

This page is about a discussion I had with an individual on Declare War on Iraq.

Writer:

I'm doing a research paper on the war on terror and its factors, your website is extremely helpful, but what is your opinion on the war? Do you believe that we can come out victorious or is this going to be another Vietnam? Do you believe that the war is directly linked to the current recession? If you were the president what would you have done differently? And do think that our occupation in the Middle East countries could provoke more attacks on the U.S.? Thanks for a great site!

David:

Thank you for your email on declare war on Iraq.

My opinion is that unless we are willing to commit 500,000 troops to be on the ground at one time so we can deal with all the various waring factions then we should pull out.

It may hurt our pride some to give up or declare war on Iraq but the loss of life and the financial burden is not worth the pain and suffering our military personnel and their families are going through.

Now it is not just Iraq and Afghanistan, it is Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, Iran, Somalia, Pakistan, and other countries involved in trying to conquer other people by force and killing.

The United States is trying to do it alone. We cannot do it alone. We need to pull back and build up our defenses at home.

This is nothing like Vietnam. The Vietnamese never did nor do they now have any intentions of trying to conquer and subdue the American people.

They did not nor do they have the resources to bring an attack on American soil. The current recession has nothing to do with the war. The recession is caused by Americans living on credit instead of learning how to budget their money and live within those means.

Credit is killing our country, not our declare war on Iraq. We are due for a financial spanking and if we had gone ahead and taken our spanking last year instead of providing so many bailouts, then we could be on our way to a real recovery. We are on a recovery built inside a bubble, a bubble that will burst. The longer it takes for that bubble to burst, the harder it will be for us to recover.

Had I been the President, I would have dropped a nuclear weapon on Osama's hiding place. We knew where it was shortly after the bombing. It would not have mattered if we killed Osama or not--we would have shown terrorists that we were not afraid to use WMD to counter them. We are trying to fight a war against animals, treating them as gentlemen. We cannot win with this attitude. In order to achieve victory, we have to destroy everything so that we make the enemy sick of war. It is only when they are sick of war that they will surrender and completely lay down their weapons. We have not done this in Iraq and Afghanistan. We have to remember that we were initially invited to Saudi Arabia because they were afraid they were next. It would not have mattered if we were there or not, they would have attacked us because to them we are infidels and do not deserve to live on the earth. Radical Muslims have been attacking countries all over the world that had nothing to do with the Middle East. Bosnia and Rwanda are two that come to mind. They will continue to attack the US and whoever else they can because it is their motto to kill. They would rather kill then live in peace. We could get into a whole theologically discussion here if we wanted to.

Writer:

So, you think it would be wise for the U.S. to pull out and attack later. Even if it meant humiliation, because we couldn't "handle it." What if this action makes more radical Muslims think they can get away without a scratch?

I agree that the Bush administration should have just dropped a bomb on Osama the moment Al Qaeda attacked us instead of to declare war on Iraq.

Do you think the Bush administration had any other reason for declaring war other than terrorism? Such as the second largest oil deposit on the planet sitting beneath Iraq and other countries' feet? Thank you so much for responding. It's helping a lot.

David:

The US does need to pull out and give up. Rather some humiliation now to declare war on Iraq than to continue on with the needless killing of Americans. We cannot fight this battle alone especially against a group that hides behind the skirts of women and the innocence of children.

War is about complete destruction of your enemy. You destroy your enemy by taking away his will to fight and this can only be accomplished by totally annihilating everything he has--his family, his property--everything--then he loses the heart and will to fight.

This is what we did to Germany and Japan. We did not do this in Vietnam. For instance, we did not bomb the capital of North Vietnam (Hanoi) or any of its major cities. We should have laid these to waste if we wanted to win.

We cannot win this declare war on Iraq because we cannot totally annihilate our enemy. And we are dealing with people who have the mentality, at most, of a US fifth grader--this is why they are so easily misled.

After 9-11 Americans wanted blood and President Bush gave us blood. Our mistake was not realizing that there are parts of the world who do not embrace freedom as we do. President Bush thought if he took out Saddam then freedom would reign in Iraq and possibly the region.

If we wanted the oil then we would have taken it in the first war. If you are the President and you have two experts telling you that you must attack and two experts telling you do not attack what do you do? Who do you believe?

You know Saddam has WMD because your country sold them to him during his war with Iran. You know he used them. Who would you believe?

We can sit here in hindsight and say we should not have taken out Saddam because we did not find the Weapons of Mass Destruction. This is wrong thinking and I have explained this on the site in WMD and other pages.

Hindsight is always better than foresight.

We have no way of knowing if our invasion has stopped attacks on the US and other countries. What would we be saying if the reverse happened. What if President Bush did nothing and another attack did happen? It was/is a damned if you do and damned if you do not situation.

There are, I believe, many things about this war that are Classified and it will be years before we can know what is really happening. For instance, it was other European countries (I think the French) who were building the Nuke facilities for Saddam--Saddam had no one in his country with the intelligence to do this--so someone was helping him--for money. This would not play well on the political scene if this information were released.

That is very true. Some say we aren't fighting because of terrorism or WMD but rather to help the smaller countries.

In your opinion, is the U.S. pretending to use the "big brother" idea to keep ties all over the world? Declare war on Iraq?

Do you believe this war is worth the fight or that radical Muslims will never change, as you said "They would rather kill then live in peace."

So we are there for nothing, we will fight maybe we'll win maybe lose, but all in all it seems like a hopeless cause. After we round up the terrorist from the "war on terror" what then?

Do we leave or do we continue to watch and control all government in the countries in which we are fighting? Why not declare war on Iraq?

When you say all the countries then I am assuming you mean the Middle East--Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and so on--we could not let Saddam take Kuwait and then he would have moved in Saudi Arabia who had no military at the time--this would have left the whole world in a bind over oil--in the end this would have caused a lot more problems than what we are facing now--maybe--but also who ever had the oil would have needed a market or there would have been no reason for them to have the oil--so perhaps we should have stayed out of everyone's way and let them do to each other as they would--especially since Osama claims he attacked the WTC because we were in Saudi Arabia--I doubt this is true but he had to have a reason and we gave him one--

The US being the only ones who declare war on Iraq. The reasons why we are in the battles we are in today are muddied and not as clear as each day goes by--we thought we could declare war on Iraq and win the war on terror by taking out this country or that but then the terrorist just move to another country. So we are back to square one--unless we are willing to totally wipe out the enemy and all that he has, then we cannot win.

Since we are not willing to do this, then we should pull our people out from all the places we are and come home. I think we should even close many of our embassies and bring them home. We need to stop trying to be the big brother of the world--the world has grown up and no longer needs us or want us.

In Haiti, just a day after the earthquake, Haitians were complaining and asking where the US was. Why were we not there helping already. Since when did it become our job to go in and rescue everyone--now today they are singing our praises but given time they will be cursing us as everyone eventually does.

Writer and the end of Declare War On Iraq:

I completely agree. The U.S. has it own problems so we should take care of ourselves first or we won't be able to take care of ANYONE later. Thank you so much for your time. It was a great help. I enjoyed this conversation. Thanks again. You're very intelligent and opened my eyes to the reality that is. -Best wishes

It has been a long time since anyone has called me intelligent. OK. No one has ever referred to me as intelligent.

I hope you enjoyed the article on declare war on Iraq.

Thank you for your visit.

Go to Home Page from Declare War on Iraq.

Have A Suggestion, Comment or Question?

Do you have a suggestion, comment or question? Then share it with us: