Do Americans Know What Happened in Iraq?

JBeee

Time Out
Jun 1, 2007
1,826
52
48
By Michael O'Brien
September 5, 2010

A Fox News poll released last week indicates the majority of Americans feel the Iraq war was a success. It also suggests they want to get past it and focus on other things. This is good and bad. It is good that average Americans can put our invasion of Iraq in 2003 out of their minds. It is bad because it indicates they don’t know what happened, or don’t care.

According to the Fox News article, 900 people were surveyed by telephone and asked questions such as “Do you think the war was a success?” “Do you think the Iraqi people are better off now than before the war?” However, the survey didn’t ask some very important questions. For example, it didn’t ask the respondents questions such as “Have you ever been to Iraq?” “Have you ever read a book about the Iraq War?” “Do you know the number of Iraqis who died in the war?” These would be very interesting questions to ask along with the others. They would gauge the level of knowledge and awareness of the respondents to judge the veracity of the answers they gave. According to the Fox News article:

“Despite its contentious history, most American voters appear to have made a positive judgment about the country’s efforts in Iraq. Almost six in 10 (58 percent) voters think, overall, the United States ‘did the right thing’ by going to war, according to the latest Fox News poll.

“A little over one-third of voters (35 percent) take the opposite view – that the U.S. “did the wrong thing” by becoming involved militarily in Iraq. From a partisan perspective, there is still division – as 54 percent of Democrats think the U.S. did the wrong thing in Iraq, while only 14 percent of Republicans feel the same way. A slim majority of independents (52 percent) think the U.S. did the right thing in Iraq.”

Did the United States do the “right thing” when we invaded Iraq in March 2003? I look at things as opposites. For example, what would Iraq be like today if we had not invaded in 2003? Chances are Saddam would still be in power, and the life of the typical Iraqi would be pretty much the same today as it was then. I was in Iraq for 14 months, and the Iraqis I worked with told me what their lives were like before we invaded. If they kept out of trouble, they got by. For many Americans, it was right for us to go there and change the Iraqi form of government, even if they didn’t ask us to, and even though thousands of Iraqis died in the effort. The Iraqis I worked with would say to me, “Mr. Mike, we understand Mr. Bush wants to fight the War on Terror, but why did he pick Iraq to do it?” What could I say to them?

“An even larger share of voters (71 percent) expresses some level of agreement with the view that the Iraqi people are better off today because of the U.S.-led action, while 19 percent disagree.”

So, the question remains, are the Iraqi people better off after our invasion? Many Americans say we went there to defend our freedom, to take the war to the enemy. If so, why didn’t President Bush give that as his reason for invading, instead of going after Saddam’s WMDs? What threat was Iraq to the United States in 2003? Were we about to be attacked by Saddam Hussein? Was he on his way?

Obviously, the answer is no, and he was no more a threat to our national security than Belize. If we went there to export democracy, why weren’t we given this as a reason as well? The fact is, we weren’t given any of these reasons, which puts the entire rationale for invading Iraq into question. We invaded a country that posed no threat to us, or even to any of its neighbors. Iraq’s sin was having a bad actor for a dictator who had made an assassination attempt on President Bush’s father.

Therefore, how can a majority of Americans think the war was the “right thing?”

By saying this, they are also saying they’re OK with being misled, with being lied to. That may be OK with them, but it’s certainly not with me.

“If Iraq is considered a success, who deserves the credit? Voters are pretty clear, as a 54-percent majority names former President George W. Bush as the person who should be acknowledged as most responsible for the success in Iraq. Some 19 percent think President Obama deserves the most credit. Some 14 percent volunteer the view that neither of the presidents, but instead the Iraqi people are most deserving of this accolade. Interestingly, Democrats are evenly divided on this question (34 percent Bush, 34 percent Obama).”

I find this part of the survey especially disturbing, for it is assigning credit for the successful invasion of Iraq. Not only is it interesting that a majority of Americans think it was successful, it is also interesting that Fox wants to assign credit to Bush or Obama for the success. Who gets the credit for all of those dead Iraqis who would be alive today if we had not invaded in March 2003? Who gets the credit for doing nothing for nearly four years while Iraq went down the drain as a result of our invasion? Who gets the credit for disbanding the Iraqi army and national police, thereby leaving the country totally defenseless against the growing insurgency? Who will get the credit for dismantling the Ba’ath Party, which included all government officials and bureaucrats who knew how to keep the basic functions of government operating? Who gets the credit for losing 190,000 AK-47 rifles that the U.S. purchased for issue to the Iraqi army and national police, many of which ended up in the hands of insurgents? Did the Fox poll ask these questions too?

“All in all, voters seem to have moved past the divisions that formerly characterized the Iraq War debate and now judge the enterprise to have been – overall at least – a success.”

It’s nice the average American feels our invasion of Iraq in March 2003 was a success. Do they feel this way because America is always right, even if we’re wrong? Do they feel this way because of the “surge,” even though it was executed four years after the invasion, and was done because the previous four years were a disaster? Do they feel this way because they have never been to Iraq or seen bodies of dead Iraqi civilians lying in a pile on the sidewalk? Would they feel this way if a house half a mile from where they worked in Baghdad was found with 60 decapitated bodies in it while Gen. George Casey, the U.S. commander in Iraq, was telling everyone the war was going great?

Polls like this give the American people a very slanted view of reality. But they can sleep soundly at night knowing that we killed at least 100,000 Iraqis to defend our freedom.
 

Kreskin

Doctor of Thinkology
Feb 23, 2006
21,155
149
63
If the choices are just politicians I'm surprised 100% didn't give Bush credit.
 

CUBert

Time Out
Aug 15, 2010
1,259
2
38
Canada
The Iraq war wasn't thought out very well, there was no real plan, and stupid decisions were made. Mainly Paul Bremer's decision to disband the Iraqi army leaving 400,000 out of work . The unpreparedness going in to the war is the reason why the war has gone on for as long as it has.
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
548
113
Vernon, B.C.
I think the ones who watched C.N.N. probably do. They had a couple of reliable reporters covering it. Their names escape me right now.
 

JBeee

Time Out
Jun 1, 2007
1,826
52
48
Peter Arnett, the only journalist with any balls to report the truth on first war started by Bush senior, got fired for it.

Then along came Michael Ware hired to tow the line for state-television CNN and its propaganda of the second invasion, a war based on lies from the very beginning by Bush junior.

The rest, Anderson Cooper and a few other CNN regulars were sent over there for the entertainment aspect which Americans seemed to enjoy most.


I think the ones who watched C.N.N. probably do. They had a couple of reliable reporters covering it. Their names escape me right now.
 

The Old Medic

Council Member
May 16, 2010
1,330
2
38
The World
You really do hate the USA, don't you Nuggler?

No American that I have ever met has ever thought that the US won in Vietnam. Only a true fool would make such an ignorant statement.

The USA lost in Vietnam because it refused to keep its treaty obligations, the Congress cut off all funding for ammunition and weapons for the Republic of Vietnam, and we allowed the North to invade and did absolutely nothing about it.

Funny thing, the US won every battle decisively, yet it lost the war. It lost it politically, not militarily.

I happen to be very proud of my two tours in Vietnam. I vividly remember the villages where we brought soap, clothing and medical care to primitive folks. I also remember returning to one village, and finding the headman, his wife and all of his children staked out along the trail, the man hacked to death, the females raped to death and the boys disembowled, all to show what happened to people that accepted care from the Americans. Yes indeed, those Communists were, and still are, wonderful folks.

And in fact, the Dominos did indeed fall. Cambodia and Laos fell to the Communists, and the Vietnamese murdered over 1,000,000 of their own people, the Laotians murdered over 300,000 of their people and the Cambodians murdered over 5,000,000 of their people. That doesn't even count the millions that escaped from those countries.

They remain among the poorest of the poor in Asia, because of the Communist rule and utter stagnation that they have experienced. South Vietnam went from being the 2nd largest exporter of rice in all of Asia, to being a massive importer of rice. It's economy went from 3rd best in Asia to near the bottom, after the North took control.

Yes, the US lost that war, but the real losers were the Vietnamese people.

And I'll bet that people like Nuggler just revel in all that misery. Anything to show those lousy Americans that they are no good, right?
 

Cobalt_Kid

Council Member
Feb 3, 2007
1,760
17
38
I used to be very negative about the war in Iraq until family members started to deploy there for tours, it really changes your perception.

It's a dirty ugly war that shouldn't have happened, but to it's credit the US is doing the best it can to leave the country in as good a position as possible. There's no going back, but American citizens should never forget how and why this war was started and fought.
 

Nuggler

kind and gentle
Feb 27, 2006
11,596
141
63
Backwater, Ontario.
You really do hate the USA, don't you Nuggler?

No American that I have ever met has ever thought that the US won in Vietnam. Only a true fool would make such an ignorant statement.

The USA lost in Vietnam because it refused to keep its treaty obligations, the Congress cut off all funding for ammunition and weapons for the Republic of Vietnam, and we allowed the North to invade and did absolutely nothing about it.

Funny thing, the US won every battle decisively, yet it lost the war. It lost it politically, not militarily.

I happen to be very proud of my two tours in Vietnam. I vividly remember the villages where we brought soap, clothing and medical care to primitive folks. I also remember returning to one village, and finding the headman, his wife and all of his children staked out along the trail, the man hacked to death, the females raped to death and the boys disembowled, all to show what happened to people that accepted care from the Americans. Yes indeed, those Communists were, and still are, wonderful folks.

And in fact, the Dominos did indeed fall. Cambodia and Laos fell to the Communists, and the Vietnamese murdered over 1,000,000 of their own people, the Laotians murdered over 300,000 of their people and the Cambodians murdered over 5,000,000 of their people. That doesn't even count the millions that escaped from those countries.

They remain among the poorest of the poor in Asia, because of the Communist rule and utter stagnation that they have experienced. South Vietnam went from being the 2nd largest exporter of rice in all of Asia, to being a massive importer of rice. It's economy went from 3rd best in Asia to near the bottom, after the North took control.

Yes, the US lost that war, but the real losers were the Vietnamese people.

And I'll bet that people like Nuggler just revel in all that misery. Anything to show those lousy Americans that they are no good, right?


Nope, don't hate Americans; and, further, believe they are amongst the most generous and kind people on the earth. BUT!!!

Sorry. There ARE some Americans who believe that they WON the Vietnam war. I didn't say every American believes it. Check out the bible belt and the deep south, and their opinions. People who believe Gerry Falwell will believe anything.

The reason you lost it was:

1. Congress tied one hand behind your collective backs.

2. You can NEVER win a war with people who are fighting for their country. Check out Iraq and Afghanistan. As soon as the US pulls out of Iraq, and Canada out of Afghanistan, the Tallyban will be back big as life. Glad we had a leader with some balls when Bushy sent you folks off to die in Iraq. Our prime minister realized it was a phony war based on a phony premise, and told him to get stuffed.

3, Commie China might have had something to do with Vietnam also. We can't say that now, as they are going to be the next superpower, and our buddies and trading partners.:sign11:

I'm fully aware that lots of winning hearts and minds went on. Lots of rape and murder went on too. Lt. Calley was just one scapegoat who got caught.

Lastly, :thebirdman:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Johnnny

JBeee

Time Out
Jun 1, 2007
1,826
52
48
:smile:...tee-hee....he said `tea-baggers`

 

ironsides

Executive Branch Member
Feb 13, 2009
8,583
60
48
United States
Do Americans and Canadians know what will happen here.


German View of Islam

This is by far the best explanation of the Muslim terrorist situation I have ever read. His references to past history are accurate and clear. Not long, easy to understand, and well worth the read. The author of this email is said to be Dr. Emanuel Tanay, a well-known and well-respected psychiatrist.

A German's View on Islam...
A man whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War II, owned a number of large industries and estates.

When asked how many Germans were true Nazis, the answer he gave can guide our attitude toward fanaticism. "Very few were true Nazis," he said, "but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us. We had lost control, and the end of our world had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories."

We are told again and again by 'experts' and 'talking heads' that Islam is the religion of peace and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace. Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the specter of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam.

The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history. It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, and honor-kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the doctrine of stoning and hanging rape victims and homosexuals. It is the fanatics who teach their young to kill and to become suicide bombers.

The hard, quantifiable fact is that the peaceful majority, the 'silent majority,' is cowed and extraneous.

Communist Russia was comprised of people who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant.

China's huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.

The average Japanese prior to World War II was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet.

And who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery.
Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were peace loving?

History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason, we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points:

 

Avro

Time Out
Feb 12, 2007
7,815
65
48
55
Oshawa
I was joking.

The Iraq war was an imperialistic mistake based on info that was flawed to the nth degree and was responsible for killing tens of thousands, displaced countless others and at a cost of billions while making recruitment lines for terror groups larger.

It also took resources away from the other mistake in Afghanistan.
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history. - Quote from article submitted by Ironsides.

Same can be said about the Christians and the Jews.

All Christians? All Jews? All Muslims?

Come on Petros and Ironsides you are vastly overgeneralizing. The average Christian or Jew is not led or swayed by the extremists in his or her religion; and neither is the average Muslim. If such was the case regarding Muslims, fanatical Muslims would not have to resort to acts of terror against members of their own religion.

There are huge numbers of moderate or even secular Christians, Jews, and Muslims, worldwide. This is about a tiny number of nutcases trying to have their way and using terror to achieve their goals. For the most part such campaigns have the opposite effect; turning people away from the religion rather than encouraging them to fall into line, hence the large numbers of people who pay lip service to their religion, but have little to do with it otherwise.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.
The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history. - Quote from article submitted by Ironsides.



All Christians? All Jews? All Muslims?

Come on Petros and Ironsides you are vastly overgeneralizing. The average Christian or Jew is not led or swayed by the extremists in his or her religion; and neither is the average Muslim. If such was the case regarding Muslims, fanatical Muslims would not have to resort to acts of terror against members of their own religion.

There are huge numbers of moderate or even secular Christians, Jews, and Muslims, worldwide. This is about a tiny number of nutcases trying to have their way and using terror to achieve their goals. For the most part such campaigns have the opposite effect; turning people away from the religion rather than encouraging them to fall into line, hence the large numbers of people who pay lip service to their religion, but have little to do with it otherwise.

Well, unfortunately, in Islam the nuts have taken over the nuthouse. A radical theocracy in Iran, intensely interested in the export of its own brand of fanatacism and the complete destruction of Israel.....Hamas in Gaza. Hezbollah in Lebanon...........radical imams and rebel Jihadists in Afghanistan and Pakistan............the kingdonm of Saudi Arabia feeding the worst of the radicals.....

There simply is no parallel in Jewish or Christian history.......

The clash of civilizations has been re-ignited, and we need to win.
 

ironsides

Executive Branch Member
Feb 13, 2009
8,583
60
48
United States
I don't see it so much as a religious battle in the Christian or Jewish community as it is in the Islamic states. No, and there all not fanatics either. We can narrow this down a little bit more, who or what groups still use beheadings, dismemberment and stoning as punishment today. (in regards to their common law) Which group blows up a crowded market place just to make a point. Today, these groups mostly originate from Islamic states (Saudia Arabia, Iran, Sudan etc.) Yes there are "There are huge numbers of moderate Muslims, worldwide." but what are these moderates doing to control the terror in their respective countries, outside the U.S. we don't see very much corporation between the Islamic and general populations. In the U.S. there is a larger percentage of Muslim Americans joining the fight against terrorism, at least we are trying. For a very tiny number, the terrorists manage to scare an awful lot into silence.