U.S. in Iraq: Liberators or Occupiers?
Is the U.S. a liberating force or an occupying force?
First look at the facts:
1. America wants the hell out of Iraq.
2. America pays for Iraqi oil like everyone else and at the same prices. Thus, we did not "go to war for oil".
3. America wants Iraq to independantly govern itself and become a member of the international community.
"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." -Einstein
Originally Posted by Pannonian
Re: U.S. in Iraq: Liberators or Occupiers?
Oh God.. this will be fun!
Liberator. Theres little doubt America had its own interests at heart as well as the Iraqi people's when we took out Saddam - but now he's gone, and we're devoted to helping the Iraqis.
Re: U.S. in Iraq: Liberators or Occupiers?
Undecided!
Do not understand what you say? You say they fight the chaos? Well they abolished Saddams regime but at the same time they imported terror. Hope they can fix it soon.
US companies rebuilt the oil infrastructure. They lend the money and get rights on oil. US administrator decided that employees of companies of the allies do not have to pay taxes.
Right! But the US forces will stay there and control the oil region.
Re: U.S. in Iraq: Liberators or Occupiers?
While I was very strongly against the war and the motives behind it, in addition to the mass deception committed by the governments involved in moving us towards the conflicts.... I have to say liberator.
The people of Iraq are now free. The fact that many of them choose to abuse their freedom by committing acts of violence against their liberators is a sad sign and forces the allied forces to behave more like occupiers.
The allies will have to leave the country soon, but if they pull out too soon they will have achieved nothing because an equally oppressive regime will emerge in Saddam's place. Their continuing presence again gives them the appearance of occupiers but it is for the people's own good.
Cowardice is to run from the fear;
Bravery is not to never feel the fear.
Bravery is to be terrified as hell;
But to hold the line anyway.
Re: U.S. in Iraq: Liberators or Occupiers?
The official reason and what (I assume) is the average thoughts among the troops says liberators. It doesn't matter if the goverment have shady deals behind the sceens in that aspect.
If US ends up as liberators depends on what happens next:
If US succeed with getting a strong democracy into Iraq, it's liberators, if they leave too early, it's failed liberators, if they create a puppet, it's occupiers and if it gets brutalised there, it's occupiers.
So unsurpricingly, I voted liberators
We are all aware that the senses can be deceived, the eyes fooled. But how can we be sure our senses are not being deceived at any particular time, or even all the time? Might I just be a brain in a tank somewhere, tricked all my life into believing in the events of this world by some insane computer? And does my life gain or lose meaning based on my reaction to such solipsism?
Project PYRRHO, Specimen 46, Vat 7
Activity Recorded M.Y. 2302.22467
TERMINATION OF SPECIMEN ADVISED
Re: U.S. in Iraq: Liberators or Occupiers?
That is one thing I'd have to agree with. Oil prices have gone up, not down. Unless of course they are hiding all the oil to manipulate the market prices...2. America pays for Iraqi oil like everyone else and at the same prices. Thus, we did not "go to war for oil".
And I might have to say both. If you had said conquerer or something, then I'd disagree with it, but America certaintly occupied Iraq for a while.
"But if you should fall you fall alone,
If you should stand then who's to guide you?
If I knew the way I would take you home."
Grateful Dead, "Ripple"
Re: U.S. in Iraq: Liberators or Occupiers?
Though i disagree about the motives and the way the war was won, we are deinately the liberators. Occupiers would imply that we want to make it a terriotory which is certainly not true.
Re: U.S. in Iraq: Liberators or Occupiers?
A little bit of both.
"The ink of the scholar is more holy than the blood of the martyr."
“I only defended myself and the honor of my family” - Nazanin
Re: U.S. in Iraq: Liberators or Occupiers?
Well I say liberators because of the motivations of the troops and the Americans people though I have a lot of doubts about the administration. The Iraqi people are however beginning to increasingly see the Americans as Occupiers and IMO it's time for the Americans to get out of Dodge.
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
-- John Stewart Mills
But from the absolute will of an entire people there is no appeal, no redemption, no refuge but treason.
LORD ACTON
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks