IS what the American government doing in Iraq a form of Genocide?
456999
As much as I do not agree with what is going on over there, I would hardly call it genocide.  We are not trying to exterminate an entire race.
453486
Genocide = bad. What else is there to say?
1087888
Government of America's Choice? How is that when Iraq held their own elections?
610684
You are talking of justice and fairness in UN when US is around.\nNo more kidding.\n\nBy the way the ratio of killings in Iraq is 100 Iraqis versus 1 American.\n\nAnd more scaring/dangerous fact is that it is acceptable to Iraqis and unacceptable to Americans.\n\nCan you imagine the outcome?
994644
your question isn't very well put so i don't know exactly what you mean. but we went to iraq to help those people living under sadam who was horrible to them.
934649
Thats quite an interesting article, thank you for putting it up, and i agree with ecerything the generals say, but do you not think there is larger issues here? The ineffectiveness of the iraqi govt, caused by the clash of ethnic groups but also by the duality of relying on US troops while also trying to distance themselves from US policies, and other issues like this? I respect what the generals say but are they not purely looking at this from a military and practical perspective? Killing every terrorist and insurgent will not finish this war, because its impossible...hmm i cant see an alternative way of getting out of this situation but i also refuse to believe that its as simple a solution as issuing killing orders...tho that would be a step forward i admit
569088
No and quite frankly why should anyone help the Americans to solve this problem. The civilised world was screaming at them not to invade Iraq, but no America knows best. So really America should clean up this mess and finally realise that war is not just cruise missiles flying over the skies of Baghdad in a pyrotechnic display of shock and awe. \n\nAmerica was founded by a group of idealists that wanted to remove the shackles of imposed government. May be it is time that America returns back to it's founding fathers and reexamines it's gun ho attitude to the world. \n\nMay be she can realise that yes Saddam Hussein was a tyrant, but for a civilised world, there has to be alternative to war and bloodshed. Is that not why the UN was set up after the second world war to try and avoid the carnage being repeated?
95959
The war and "help" in Iraq is all for selfish purposes. IE: they have oil that we need. If the government was really that interested in helping other countries they would start with Africa where they've had genocide taking place and the numbers of people who have AIDS and are starving are astronomical. Africa though can't help us and doesn't have any commodities that our government wants. Simple as that. That being said, if the government was really all that concerned about those in need, at the very least they'd start with all of those who were affected by Hurricane Katrina. It is insane that there are many, many, MANY motor homes and trailers are sitting in lots while there are people and I don't just mean a few, who are living in "tent cities" with outhouses for bathrooms that they share with hundreds of other people. Yes, this is still happening TODAY. I am not talking about what happened 6 months ago. They are being forced to suffer simply because of red tape.\n\nI know that the Iraqi people have suffered but so have many others including our fellow countrymen. The reason the Iraqi's got so lucky is that they have something we want/need. I won't even get started on the potential reprecussions of Bush letting the ports be used by Arab nations...........
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.
852877
The kidnappings and mass murders are being done by the insurgents. Only a relatively small percentage of Iraqis were killed by Americans. Almost all Iraqis were killed by foreign insurgents and by other Iraqis.\n\nThey kill each other there every day, and our troops get killed by getting between them.
474825
Well, of course, some people might say that, but there's a big difference.  A colonization entails not just occupying a nation, but taking over all government operations, dictating it's policies, and integrating it into the national life.\n\nIn the case of Iraq, no one in America imagines it as a long-term venture.  Perhaps people in the government do, but American people certainly don't imagine being involved in Iraq, or even occupying the nation for very long.  The stated goal has always been to remove the dictator, and then help the nation get back on its feet quickly, and then leave.  Only because of all the terrorism is America still involved.  \n\nI never supported the invasion at that time, but calling it colonization is really silly, and it just shows that much of the debate is not based in reality.  It's become a matter of trying to embarrass members of different political movements, and it leads nowhere.
266415
I've heard plenty of the Armenian Genocide. I have a few Armenian friends, and they've told me stories that has been passed on by theyre grandparents and great grandparents. Its sad that the Turkish government denies that the genocide ever took place. I dont doubt the U.S. would do such a thing either, I mean, c'mon, what about the genocide done to the Native tribes? You never hear about them, like they never happened.
14164
United States is evil. It just wants to approach it goals even if the cost is the life of millions of people. At that time the United States supported Iraq because it knew that the holy government of Iran is the biggest obstacle in Americas way to approach it's evil goals. But as soon as the Americans saw that Saddam's regime was turning it's back on them they stopped supporting it. United States doesn't care about the lives of people, and the human rights, this is why they supplied Iraq with Biological and chemical weapons wich caused more than 90% of the causualties of the war.\nthree years later the United States turned it's back against Iraq when Iraq attacked Kuwait cause this time Iraq wasn't moving with respect to their goals.
734311
Which one? The slaughter of the Kurds (with chemical weapons of mass destruction) in 1991? \n\nThe current slaughter of Shiites by deposed Sunnis?\n\nThe targeting of innocent contractors who are working to rebuild Iraq by terrorists from Iran and Syria?
294907
Absolutely not. Saddam may well have been a tyrant, despot and  an egotistical maniac as well as a bully but the UN should have got him out when he sent troops into Kuwait in the 90's and there was truly an international coalition against him. They had the moral high ground then and a mandate from the UN which made Operations Desert Sheild and Desert Storm legal under International Law plus there were many arab nations involved.\n\nThis time things are different. The so called coalition is made up of mainly American and British forces with a few small contingents from some countries, the majority had no wish or desire to become involved. The case for invasion this time was flimsy at worst and a complete pack of lies at best.\n\nUN inspectors found no evidence of chemical weapons let alone weapons of mass destruction yet at the UN members were shown "spy satellite photo's" of mobile chemical trucks and production facilities. Strange how the inspectors never found any of it. When America and Britain put forward a resolution calling for the invasion of Iraq most of the UN voted it down, the US and UK virtually thumbed their noses at the UN and went ahead with the invasion anyway.\n\nSo now we have a situation where the "liberators" are now the occupiers, insurgents are all over the country, American and British soldiers are being attacked daily, suicide bomings are becoming more and more frequent, kidnappings of Westerners and Muslims is increasing, the new Iraqi Government is virtually paralised by internal squabbling, the American trained Iraqi Security Forces are bareley holding their own and the whole country is sliding ever more closer to civil war and anarchy. Yet both Britain and America maintain that things are getting better.\n\nReally where??.
713865
no jackass. the gov't has not failed us.  What is your job?? most likely something that is unimportant to people living in the US.  maybe you should stop complaining about the gov't and get your ass over in Iraq and do something for america. dumbass
14451
This is not exactly a Law & Ethics question.  Nevertheless, no, Iraq is not bound for its own self-destruction, at least no more so than when Saddam Hussein was running the country and slaughtering his own people.