
As part of President Obama’s plan to end combat operations in Iraq by 2010, it was decided that two brigades which were supposed to be sent back to Iraq this year, will not be replaced, and thus reducing the number of US forces by 12000.
Officials have stated that the withdrawal of the troops is based on the fact that Iraq is now much safer than before, making this step an appropriate one. This statement came a couple of hours after a suicide bomber bombed himself near the police academy in Baghdad, killing 28 people, and injuring around 60, all of which triggering the thought if Iraq’s “security” is really the main issue of concern for those troops as they claim...
“We know that Al Qaeda, although greatly reduced in capability and numbers, still is desperate to maintain relevance here in Iraq.” A U.S. spokesman, Maj. Gen. David Perkins said.
The sad thing as I see it, is that before the US invasion of Iraq, I didn’t hear of Al Qaeda bombing public places... And if bombings were actually occurring then, they weren’t half as much as they became after the US invasion.
Now this is something to think about!!!
Or, ghosts are invading the place... Bhooooooo
LOL
OK sadam was evil guy, and it would be great if Iraqis can get peace back and rule themselves again and then ill think the war wasnt in vain.....but the Iraq war unsettled me and i was against it from the beggining for a number of reasons....it was pre emptive aggression which was dishonourable, a country is innocent until proven guilty.....and the reasons for war were never proven ......I am greatly dissapointed about the inception of this war.
(even though its terrific if Iraq gets peace and the end justifies the means so to speak for their future)
But the precedent and grounds for this war disturb me greatly because pre emptive agression devoid of evidence is something not to be expected by upstanding champions in diplomacy in the world, who advocate rule of law freedom of rights and unauthoritarianism; things which i admire and love about where i live my govt etc.
Which means if the war wasnt conducted for the reasons given then it leaves open for presumptions and suspicions other motives and vested interests. eg did George W want to avenge his dads unfinished grudge and other such motives.
Its a very dangerous precedent in the world affairs, as now Russia moved into Goergia under similiar excuses and moral authority has been eroded for the cheapening practises of spin doctors and propagandists.
Pre emptive aggression must be used with utmost evidence and imminent threat lest its practise is degenerate like as hitler used it with propaganda for other objectives...poland etc and influence.
But Afghanistan war is legitimate self defense and logical and of good conscience.
Iraq war didnt have these same proprieties for a sound and functional legitimacy and it rests uneasy with me, when other powers like Russia eg or other big players decide to take the same methodology, and world opinion becomes permissive and cynical, and do not support the west anymore against other aggressors in the world ....always harking back and citing hypocrasy of iraq war....we must set the example of legitimate war.
The inception standards qualifying war in Iraq will hurt long term interests and popularity of the west, even if it produces a stable democracy, because people will be cynical of the motives of every other action of the west and we become distrusted.
well,,, what can I say... I very much agree with u :D and I would like to add to ur opinion here: the world is filled with leaders like Saddam, but Saddam was one of those who kind of didn’t go by American rules, and he also lead a country of great scientists, a combination that the American government felt threatened by, thus the invasion and the death of thousands of innocent people...
I very much hope they regain their independence, and maybe their scientists...
Nice to see you here :)
Local Opinions (0)
Global Opinions (9)
This is not the first time the West has walked away and taken unilateral action when it suits them...when will people ever learn..
Even now they have not admitted the WMD mistake...it was a pure and personal revenge on Saddam (not that he was a saint)....after using him against Iran in the Iran - Iraq war..
Now, more seriously, yes they have walked away before, and they will now, it is just depressing that they are walking away, leaving Iraq in a bigger mess than the one they came in to (allegedly) rescue.
Or, ghosts are invading the place... Bhooooooo
LOL
OK sadam was evil guy, and it would be great if Iraqis can get peace back and rule themselves again and then ill think the war wasnt in vain.....but the Iraq war unsettled me and i was against it from the beggining for a number of reasons....it was pre emptive aggression which was dishonourable, a country is innocent until proven guilty.....and the reasons for war were never proven ......I am greatly dissapointed about the inception of this war.
(even though its terrific if Iraq gets peace and the end justifies the means so to speak for their future)
But the precedent and grounds for this war disturb me greatly because pre emptive agression devoid of evidence is something not to be expected by upstanding champions in diplomacy in the world, who advocate rule of law freedom of rights and unauthoritarianism; things which i admire and love about where i live my govt etc.
Which means if the war wasnt conducted for the reasons given then it leaves open for presumptions and suspicions other motives and vested interests. eg did George W want to avenge his dads unfinished grudge and other such motives.
Its a very dangerous precedent in the world affairs, as now Russia moved into Goergia under similiar excuses and moral authority has been eroded for the cheapening practises of spin doctors and propagandists.
Pre emptive aggression must be used with utmost evidence and imminent threat lest its practise is degenerate like as hitler used it with propaganda for other objectives...poland etc and influence.
But Afghanistan war is legitimate self defense and logical and of good conscience.
Iraq war didnt have these same proprieties for a sound and functional legitimacy and it rests uneasy with me, when other powers like Russia eg or other big players decide to take the same methodology, and world opinion becomes permissive and cynical, and do not support the west anymore against other aggressors in the world ....always harking back and citing hypocrasy of iraq war....we must set the example of legitimate war.
The inception standards qualifying war in Iraq will hurt long term interests and popularity of the west, even if it produces a stable democracy, because people will be cynical of the motives of every other action of the west and we become distrusted.
well,,, what can I say... I very much agree with u :D and I would like to add to ur opinion here: the world is filled with leaders like Saddam, but Saddam was one of those who kind of didn’t go by American rules, and he also lead a country of great scientists, a combination that the American government felt threatened by, thus the invasion and the death of thousands of innocent people...
I very much hope they regain their independence, and maybe their scientists...
Nice to see you here :)
Home

Delicious
Digg
Facebook
Reddit
Stumble Upon
Technorati
Mixx
Sphinn
Twitter
SphereIt
Propeller
Gmarks
Newsvine
Yahoo! My Web
Live Journal
Blinklist
E-mail
RSS 







This is not the first time the West has walked away and taken unilateral action when it suits them...when will people ever learn..
Even now they have not admitted the WMD mistake...it was a pure and personal revenge on Saddam (not that he was a saint)....after using him against Iran in the Iran - Iraq war..
Now, more seriously, yes they have walked away before, and they will now, it is just depressing that they are walking away, leaving Iraq in a bigger mess than the one they came in to (allegedly) rescue.