posted on Jun, 15 2014 @ 11:15 AM
You want to know what I think the cold, hard truth is? Well even if you don't, here it is: in countries that have not been civilized to the degree of
the Western world, democracy cannot work. What is the reason that Saddam's solidified power base seemed to keep more than a semblance of order in
Iraq? Because all of these zealot religious factions could not attempt to gain power without extreme consequences. Meaning death or torture and
imprisonment. Attempts at seizing power like we are seeing in Iraq after the US withdrawal were not nearly as common nor as massive during Hussein's
Now I know that I said democracy cannot work, but that is not entirely accurate. IF the democratic government is willing to go to extremes in
exercising military power, then they too can maintain it. But it will take being brutal to keep these groups broken. They will always reform, and if
the government unwilling to exercise absolute force, then anything could happen. If war is to be had at all, let it be quick and brutal. That is the
only truly humane way to wage war in my opinion. Exercising more brutality equates with the loss of fewer lives in the long run. Of course there are
things that many believe in, like certain rights, which would get in the way of truly winning such a conflict. I am not saying that we should
necessarily exclude rights for combatants or even terrorists, but what I am saying is that it might be one of the few things that actually works. But
is that really a solution? To some it is, and to some it is not.
The true problem in Iraq and other parts of the Middle East, whether one wishes to admit it or not, appears to be Islam. I would say religion in
general, but no other modernly practiced religion spawns so much violence, or so many various factions all wishing to not only seize power, but force
their religious beliefs on other people. In the sense of true religious freedom the Middle East lags behind the progress of the rest of the world.
What really saddens me is that there are people in these countries who are more liberal and who would fit nicely in a democratic or republican form of
government, but when expressing your liberality can end in you getting stoned to death, few people are willing to stand up to extremists. The same
thing happened with Hitler. About half the country did not support him when he rose to power, but what could they do when the SS was doing basically
what these extremists are doing? My point is evidenced in the US Declaration of Independence, which explicitly states that people are more apt to
suffer abuses than to correct the situation. It is true.
I cannot say with any certainty what the best solution is, but I will say that I am not entirely opposed to the idea of going back into Iraq. I do not
necessarily support it either, and I will say that I am glad the decision is not mine. People always think they know better than those who make the
decisions, and even if that were true, very few understand the pressures of such decisions and of such a high office in general. I will also say
this...For those republicans who supported Bush going into Iraq 100%, which was probably the majority of them, would you not say that intervention is
much more justified now than at that time? It has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that not only were we lied to at that time, but that those who
lied to us knew the truth. Does that not upset you? So many of these people wish to complain about Obama, which is fine if criticism is justified, but
seriously...Do you forget so soon?