It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Iraqi graditude, straight from the horses mouth!

page: 1

log in


posted on Jan, 7 2007 @ 07:48 AM
I loath the Bush administration and their policies, especially the war in Iraq.

But last week I heard something that made me think, maybe the war is doing some good after all?

A friend of mine recently returned after serving in Baghdad. I asked him point blank if he had done anything to help the civilians while he was there? This is what he told me.

There was an incident when insurgent death squads drove through the city assassinating every civilian who crossed their path. He was one of the troops ordered to stop them. After the successful elimination of these murders, the Iraqi people rejoiced in the streets, expressing their gratitude to the American solider's who saved their lives!

posted on Jan, 7 2007 @ 10:43 AM
I believe that some soldiers are doing some good in Iraq, at least on a personal level, as expressed. But they are soldiers, and they are glorified killers. The Iraqis are just learning like the Vietnamese did. Smile at anyone with a gun. Big smiles, all the time, smiles and nods. Cos anyone who ain't smiling must be a dissadent.

posted on Jan, 7 2007 @ 03:12 PM
The Iraqi war is a complex issue. No matter what perspective you use to view the war, (Iraqi Sunni, Iraqi Shiite, Iraqi Kurd, American, European, Saudi, Halliburton, etc.) the war has resulted in both good and bad things. The question is whether the good has outweighed the bad, and for whom, and why?

he war has undeniably been more good than bad for Halliburton, but wars should not be started for the benefit of corporations. The war has mostly been bad for America as many Americans died, America's international credibility and prestige, and the war has cost Americans millions of dollars. When it comes to Iraqis, the inquiry gets complicated. Iraqis are now free from the tyranny of Sadaam Hussein and have a fledgling democracy, but they are now living under the tyranny of civil war. The inquiry is further complicated in that the war and its results do not effect all Iraqis equally. Supposedly the Kurds made out alright in that the areas they live in have not been marred much by violence and they were the most persecuted under Sadaam. Sunnis seem to have taken the brunt of the bad because they were protected and favored by Sadam, and are now a minority living in fear of reprisal from a Shiite majority. Shiites on the other hand are quite a mixed bag. Shiites are suffering from the civil war like all Iraqis, yet are now in power.

posted on Jan, 8 2007 @ 12:17 AM

If you can say that this kind of thing was going on before we got there, and I mean on a daily basis like it has been for a while now, with IED's, death squads, suicide bombers and the like, I'll agree with you. If you cannot say these things were happening like it is now prior to our being there, then there is nothing to feel good about. We brought this upon those people.

posted on Jan, 8 2007 @ 02:44 PM
Yes Saddam killed far more religious fundamentalists than that one guy (you know) ever did. That’s why ThePieMan last point was so ace.
And judging by the statistics the 120,000 to 300,000 odd thousand killed through Saddam’s political oppression (over about 30 years) is a heck of a lot less than 650,000 killed by the violence liberated since our 2003 invasion.

Of course U.S troops do good things, the question is whether the good they do outbalances the harm and that question seems to have been answered by a giant “No” (as solid as the reality on the ground).

I believe it’s stupid to believe the dominant problem with the occupation is a question of the soldier character; when it is in fact clearly a political one.
You see right now we are supporting a Shiite dominated Iraqi democracy, and which will always be Shiite dominated Iraqi democracy because the Iraqi population (as a whole) is Shiite dominated, it is also Muslim fundamentalist dominated (some are also Sunni but primarily they are Shiite orientated).
Anyway what we should be doing is supporting a secular Sunni dominated dictatorship of the Muslim Fundamentalists. This option worked under Saddam, and will work once again under someone like him. This option can be chosen any time, any decade; but the longer we put it of the more of a stewed mess Iraqi society will be in.

Of course like Saddam the current Iraqi President doesn’t really give a toss about religion providing you’re politics are right. The trouble is that his politics are leading him to make too many “nice” friends; with that nasty threat to Israel (Iran). His politics leads him to incorporate Muslim fundamentalists into his political party, and positions in Iraqi government (like the elite Iraqi police we are helping to train).
His politics point Tehran, Saddam’s pointed Washington at heart, and had got along with Washington all the way till that stupid Kuwait invasion.
Our mistake was not putting that Kuwait invasion in the past (so be it whilst probably restricting military equipment sales). But we did no such thing, we choose Iraqi democracy, and when you look at Iraqis impoverished and all too frequently radicalised populace that is a very, very bad thing.


log in