Um ok first I know this is going to be moved to another section. Sry I dont know where to host this poll. But what do you guys think about the current issue being discussed among the republicans and democrats? And discuss this issue among each other. I'm curious to hear what you guys think.

It's not about what the government wants. Besides, the government was made with the US overseeing it. What about the people of Iraq?

In a way, it's the same for us. The goverment choose to do this war, but what about the people of the US? From what I've been reading in the news, majority of the people in the US are totally against this whole situation.

Ok so what the Iraqi Gov wants us there. We can't stay there long and baby them through this process of rebuilding. They are going to have to stand up for themselves.

There should be a deadline. If they cant get their sh** together by a certain time then so be it. This war was never even necessary.

They dont like the war he started.

Even if we pull out I'm sure the Iraqi forces can prevent an Al-Qaeda take over of the government and prevent them from turning Iraq into a taliban government.

When I said they I meant all the people on this planet who oppose the war in Iraq.

The question is: How many actually voted compared to the entire population?

Good point, but this wouldn't have happened if we didn't get involved in the first place.

Would you enjoy your home being blown up?

If I still had them, I would show you plenty of images showing Iraqis not liking the situation they were put in from the US.

Oh, btw, the news would never show the Iraqis not liking the situation because that would only worsen Bush's position.

Pull out. We got Saddam and, no reason to be there anymore.

If you get your news on the war from the Media then I can see why some people think we should get our troops home immediately. But until people can understand that then I pay them no mind. More people have died in my home state of Pennsylvania in car accidents this month then all the US soldiers killed in Iraq since 03.

If they didnt vote, they really have no say in the matter. They had a chance to vote for the party they thought was best, if they didnt vote, they have no right to complain.


Is it remotely possible that the majority did not vote because they did not approve of the issue? Could it be a factor that going to the polls was a life-risking event? Could it be that there was a sense of apathy since a healthy number of officials have been assassinated?


That makes no difference. They DID get involved.


How can anyone say that it makes no difference??? To dismiss the cause, however corrupt and ignorant, and suggest that it has no significance to the question is far more cold blooded that your accusation below.

During the invasion: Sure would if I was being governed by someone like SH.
After the invasion: Wouldnt like it, but I wouldnt blame the military, I'd blame the insurgents that are blowing themselves up, and I wouldnt want the military to leave while they're still blowing themselves up.


I don't think anyone here is so naive that they truly believe that someone would want their home destroyed in any circumstances. And as far as the Iraqui people, there was constant contact with UN representatives and free exchange of communications before the invasion. That is there was mail service, internet, etc. There had been sixteen investigative visits by representatives of the Red Cross. So when did the Iraqui people ask for relief from Saddam Hussein?


And what would these pictures serve to prove? That theres some Iraqis that dont like the invasion? I could show you a bunch of pictures of Iraqis that were cheering.

At the statue? Want to see evidence that it was staged?

Yes... the news is out to glorify Bush and the war. The news is not showing news reports like "Inspectors claim no WMDs" "Search for WMDs terminated with no results" "Did the president lie?" "2000+ US deaths in Iraq" Rather, they're presenting things like "Iraqi lives another happy day as a result of the invasion" over and over again.

And thank God there were some news reports showing the truth, or at least a fragment of it. That was far better that the Fox News B.S. that was more an entertainment about the depths ignorance can reach than it was ever news. I sincerely hope that there will come the day when the media will have the courage to reveal the complete truth about Bush and the actions that ranks him with all other international criminals.

The only difference I can see between Hussein and Bush is that Hussein finally complied with the U.N. sanctions.

Whether their leader was a jerk or not, we still didn't have a right to invade.

What do you suggest the US does to finish what they started?

Is it remotely possible that the majority did not vote because they did not approve of the issue? Could it be a factor that going to the polls was a life-risking event? Could it be that there was a sense of apathy since a healthy number of officials have been assassinated?

How can anyone say that it makes no difference??? To dismiss the cause, however corrupt and ignorant, and suggest that it has no significance to the question is far more cold blooded that your accusation below.

I don't think anyone here is so naive that they truly believe that someone would want their home destroyed in any circumstances.

And as far as the Iraqui people, there was constant contact with UN representatives and free exchange of communications before the invasion. That is there was mail service, internet, etc. There had been sixteen investigative visits by representatives of the Red Cross. So when did the Iraqui people ask for relief from Saddam Hussein?

At the statue? Want to see evidence that it was staged?

The Media wont have the courage to reveal the complete truth about Bush. But Michael Moore will.

we have no business being in iraq ~ especially since saddam is no longer there.....

I voted that the Coalition forces stay until Iraq is rebuild, and a stable goverment and a loyal army are setup. The USA and the coalition get their legs in mud to the groin, and now if the take out the legs it will be a very real mess...iraq, in the best case will divide, in the worst will be a killing field.

Who is it that you are referring to because I do not recall calling you ignorant or dishonest..???

But the only problem that will arise from all that is once we leave, even little by little as Stellar suggested, Iraq will eventually rely on us babysitting them. They will become weak, confident that the US will take care of anyone who opposes them.

This is the only section of your message that deserves a response.

There were many reports from independent wire service stringers in Iraq who were denied access into the staging area of the toppling of the statue.

One recorded it from a hotel balcony and it was posted at http://media.consumercide.com/saddamstatue.html.

You will see at that site that yes, the accusation of those denied entrance were that the scene was staged and yes, Iraquis were paid.

No one has said that Iraquis were happy under SH. That is an extremist response. They did not have to be happy.

But it still doesn't mean that ANYONE asked for the invasion by the United States or wanted it or wants it to continue now.

As far as me being ignorant or dishonest, that is an odd accusation.
I am sorry that you think I am ignorant or dishonest. I have always thought that you were intelligent and observant.

Well first off the whole fact that we are still here going well as a people, must mean Bush is doing something right.

56% want to defeat terror.

44% either want more terrorism or don't care, which amounts to the same thing.

There is an inclination within the community of democratic nations, especially the United States, to believe that democracy is the form of government desired by the rest of the world. The truth is that democracy does not work in many cultures and within many nations where concepts of rulers/subjects are written in stone. Democracy itself does not have a good historic track record.

The question is not how difficult it is to be a president, but whether or not this president is qualified for his role. He has diminished the reputation of the United States in all parts of the world. He has accused Iraq of defying the United Nations mandate and then went ahead and did the same himself with his middle finger foreign policy. He had led his nation into a war that cannot be justified either by defining a reason for the invasion or even an excuse of why the U.S., without international authorization or support, invaded a sovereign nation and removed its leader. He has instituted a Patriot Act that has robbed every American patriot of their Constitutional rights and now asks Congress to make that robbery permanent.

I see no indication that Iraq is prospering. What I do see is that the economy of the United States is suffering and there are no indicators that it will improve.

I have always heard about not seeing the forest for the trees. In this case is is mind boggling to the rest of the world that the people of the U.S. cannot see their crisis and its cause for the whitewashing and propaganda that they are fed and believe.

Where'd you pull those statistics out of? A hat?