Is Iraq Americans' dishonor?
350818
No.\n\nIn my opinion, the US Government felt the Iraq regime was too unstable, too dangerous, and too potentially volatile to be left in place as a detriment to the War on Terrorism. While it seems true that Iraq did not participate in 9/11, it also seems true that Iraq had approached Al Quaeda before and had offered to cooperate; it was Al Quaeda that turned down Iraq, not the other way around. One of the reasons why Hussein was more defiant in the 1990's was because the huge armies assembled for the Gulf War '91 had long since been disbanded.\n\nHistory will judge whether this was a correct or incorrect decision. I understand that a lot of people don't like President Bush. He came into office in 2001 demanding acceptance and obedience from the American people far in excess of whatever mandate he may have received from the election, and certainly has not stopped appearing arrogant. However, I do feel he made this decision with relatively good intentions. Perhaps the problem was that when he pulled his carrier stunt he really DID believe the mission was accomplished.
726559
The problem with the intellectually dishonest is that they will seek every other explanation than the plain truth and fact.\n\nThe fact is like in America, where an occupation will not be tolerated, Iraqis and Arabs, with their complexities, will not tolerate an occupation by the USA. If American troops remain in Iraq for another 100 years the result will still be the same. The truth is often much simpler than fiction. PERIOD.
25448
I don't. In fact, the overwhelming majority of Americans disapprove of President Bush. But many Americans believe that deposing Saddam Hussein will bring a new era of freedom and prosperity to Iraq and give the West a much-needed ally in that area. His supporters are more optimistic than most people about progress in Iraq and hopefully they'll turn out to be right.
586911
Amnesy International is a less biased source than President Bush, that is for certian. It is amazing that our control of this country has resulted in the deaths of thousands of civilians and we have a hard time understanding why people are so upset. We did finance Saddam, as we have done other dictators. It doesn't make it our fault that he did this to his people. I think it is just really interesting that our stated reason for going over there is that he attacked us. When that wasn't true we changed it to weapons of mass destruction. Well... that wasn't true either. Now it is presented as spreading democrarcy... hmmm... if our goal was to protect people from corrupt governments and spread democracy we would be in a lot of other countries...and we would be assisting countries that are starving. Kind of blows that out of the water doesn't it. I respect our troops deeply, that they would put their lives and destiny's on the line for us and I feel sad and distressed that we are not even being honest about why we are ending their lives as well as thousands of civilian lives that we don't talk about in the so called "liberal" media.
634051
True.  Our government lied to us about why we were going in, and like sheeps to slaughter we believed it.  Now that we are there we can't just pull out and let whoever can grab the most power the quickest take over.  I for one apologize to those who lost loved ones because our president is a warmongering moron but can't support a full pullout of troops until the Iraqi people have a firm hold on their country (i.e. government is stable and not under dictatorship).  And no there is no honesty in the U.S. government.  We gave them power and they took it and have used it without us REALLY keeping up with what they are doing.  Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
964024
American people are innocent, its the American Government that is sacrificing the young generation of Americans in Iraq .
1114262
NO - They violated laws and took short cuts\nWe need Honest Americans
1090166
250,000 Iraqis have been murdered by the barbaric American troops since the 2003 invasion. Most of them are civilians, women and children. Therefore by the Bush administrations own 'standards' you have committed genocide. I don't know about you but I do not like to be partially responsible for such war crimes, whether 250,000 deaths is genocide or not, it is an unforgivable crime. As citizens in a "democratic, freedom loving" country you should take some responsibility for the actions of your elected barbaric governments.
967980
right, the war was against Saddam Hussein and the ba'ath party, not against the people of Iraq. the whole point of it was to liberate them. second there was more than enough money in the Iraqi oil trust fund, but this was swallowed up by corrupt politicians and big corporations who took the money but didn't do the work. a lot of the insurgency is not political, it is a vendetta. a jumpy young soldier at a check point shoots up a car full of innocent people and you've got a whole family and clan taking revenge. the shia were cooperative in the beginning, but as time went by and there was no improvement, no regular electricity, no water, no sewage, no work. the hospitals closing down due to the lack of medicine and equipment. they got a tad annoyed with the Americans and British whose corporations were there to improve things but were actually just taking the cash. there was no al-qaeda there until the invasion as they saw Saddam as a heretic and he mercilessly crushed them. they came after the invasion and the break down in law and order. it is a good recruiting ground for them and they are financed by the Saudis who are terrified by the idea of a democratic shia state next door to them. we, the British and the Americans have to pay for the blundering manner which our governments chose to liberate the people of Iraq, so that millions of innocent people do not suffer. it is our fault we voted the cretins in
157452
I think liberals have a valid point when they say that we have alienated some countries over Iraq, but most of those countries weren't really lining up to help us anyway. The prevailing attitude that you see with many liberals is that America's foreign policies are to blame for 9/11 and other terror attacks, and this is simply not true. The terrorists who attacked America on 9/11 were the same terrorist who attacked America several times during the Clinton administration, when Clinton went out of his way to be "the good guy" towards the islamic world. Foreign policy is not to blame. The terrorists simply hate the Israelis, and therefore, we are guilty by association.
483749
I can't speak for other American citizens, but here is what I have observed. I am too old to learn anything new, only confirm what I have known, or believed.\n1) our fereral government only knows how to react. Not to prevent.\n2) In our country, out of disaster, rises greed.\n3) Our federal government, state government and local government officials will never do the will of the common people, only the will of the rich people.\n4) Our mislead soldiers, sailors and marines have been duped again, into believing that they are defending freedom. What they are doing is defending an illusion. The illusion that the united states knows what is best for the world. They are spreading a belief. The department of defense should be defending. That is why it is not called the department of offense\n5) I agree that the perps of 9/11 should be brought to justice. Lets find them and bring them to justice already.\nThat would be justified, but that other stuff (Iraq) is based on one thing (refer to statement 3).
300332
I suspected Greasy was trying to line up statements justifying the invasion of Iraq, but he claims he's not and added a negative for the chaotic democracy, that if you speak out you're more likely to be assassinated.  I'm still pointing out that the analogy to Iraq--intended or not--is not accurate.  The forces of democracy also face a military occupation that is widely detested, and infiltration by violent radical foreigners, and you're in danger of sliding into poverty because the economy is falling apart.\n\nIf I pretend this isn't a question about Iraq but a generic country, I'd take the chaotic democracy because most countries aren't as dysfunctional as Iraq is now, and in a fluid situation there is more hope for improvement than in a static situation such as a powerful dictator in total control.  Russia had chaotic democracy for a while and regressed to something like a Latin American pseudo-democracy, but I'd rather have lived through that than Stalin's or Brezhnev's regimes.\n\nI will still point out that the US has a shameful record of trading freedom for supposed security after 9/11.  The authors of the Bill of Rights would be disturbed to see a president repeal large chunks of it by fiat.  Anyone who voted for Bush in 2004 and now dares to lecture the Iraqis about how they should value freedom over security is profoundly hypocritical or uninformed.
813494
I think that the war has evolved into something so different than when it originated, that the majority of Americans could probably care less what happens to Saddam, especially since everyone knew that he was guilty - I mean really, how could the government NOT charge him?  To do so would cause even more anarchy then there already is.  \n\nMy guess is that America is pissed of at enough things run by the government that this verdict will have no effect whatsoever.
267161
Some of us Americans morn the Iraqi deaths as well as the American. War is bad for living things, we should have never been there in the first place. Our invasion was completely wrong and should have never happened, our leadership made a bad decision and continues to make bad decisions and there is little we can do until the next election.
1002391
Yes. Because he was ratted out by one of his own. And more and more, the Iraqi people are informing on the bloody terrorist insurgents. Iraq has taken another huge step towards being rid of these scum.\n\nGod bless our troops and all those who fight for Iraqi freedom and liberty.
1084607
Hi, I am an Englishman and never visited the States. I suppose like many people I would have to say that I have had mixed feelings about the USA. Most of the information regarding world events etc comes via the media and does not I think always give the most unbiased opinion. Not just in political events. We all see popular shows like Oprah and this without doubt has a profoundly negative effect. We see in the main what can only be described as weirdos and have to wonder if these strange selfish people are indicative of the country as a whole.\nHigh consumers, irresponsible ecological attitude and a me, me, me mind set.\nAll sounds horrible doesn't it? Thankfully there is the Internet where over the past couple of years I have made some excellent friends who have illustrated that there is a far more caring and unselfish, generous aspect to many of the citizens of the US than I previously thought. \nMy country and yours have been strong allies both economically and in time of conflict and shared a whole lot together. I personally hope that this will always be the case.\nWho knows what may happen in Iraq, North Korea and the rest of the world. But I believe that in the main (although always influenced by oil) The forces currently in Iraq are trying extremely hard to bring about stability. If they were only allowed to do so, your country and mine could bring our troops home. The sooner the better.\nIn a nut shell I am pro American. OK?
1028413
I'm an American living in Jordan, and I actually know quite a few Iraqis. I find that most of them really actually like americans, but think that George Bush is crazy. Most arabs ar really good about distinguishing people from their governments, i.e. we dont get blamed for what our government has done.