
or
Join Now!
|
|
Home/Society & Culture/Terrorism
|
| Forum |
Ask A Question |
Question Board |
FAQs |
Search |
Return to Question Board
| Question Details |
Asked By |
Asked On |
| The U.S. Mission in Iraq |
Ccl471 |
12/30/05 |
So is the U.S. military going to do a phased withdrawal now from Iraq? Is the Bush Administration finally giving in to the demands of the American people to bring the troops home?
Remember the president always said we were going to stay in Iraq until the mission is complete? In light of that, are we pulling out too early, and too fast?
After all coalition forces are out of Iraq, will Iraq's own military and police be ready to maintain security for the nation?
What about the insurgency? Am I right in assuming that even though the American people don't get it, the insurgents do? Meaning, I'm thinking the insurgents are fighting so hard to keep America from being successful in establishing a democratic Iraq because if we are successful, that will establish a precedent for other Arab countries to become democracies as well? That's why there are so many insurgents there who come from other Arab countries, I think.
If Iraq becomes everything Pres. Bush wants her to be, will citizens of the other Arab countries see how good democracy and a capitalist economy is for Iraq, and will they want the same for themselves? If so, that may spell the beginning of the end for the oppressive governments of the other Arab countries, I think.
What do you think?
Many thanks,
C.L.
|
Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 01/04/06 7:56 am: Re :Bush doctrine ...
For decades, free nations tolerated oppression in the Middle East for the sake of stability. In practice, this approach brought little stability and much oppression, so I have changed this policy. Bush address to Air Force Academy June 2, 2004
There is some justice in one charge that is frequently leveled against the United States, and more generally against the West: Middle Easterners frequently complain that the West judges them by different and lower standards than it does Europeans and Americans, both in what is expected of them and what they may expect, in terms of their economic well-being and their political freedom. They assert that Western spokesmen repeatedly overlook or even defend actions and support rulers that they would not tolerate in their own countries.
...there is nevertheless a widespread [Western] perception that there are significant differences between the advanced Western world and the rest, notably the peoples of Islam, and that these latter are in some ways different, with the tacit assumption that they are inferior. The most flagrant violations of civil rights, political freedom, and even human decency are disregarded or glossed over, and crimes against humanity, which in a European or American country would evoke a storm of outrage, are seen as normal and even acceptable.
...The underlying assumption in all this is that these people are incapable of running a democratic society and have neither concern nor capacity for human decency."
'The Crisis of Islam', Bernard Lewis.
Bush declared at West Point, "America has no empire to extend or utopia to establish. We wish for others only what we wish for ourselves -- safety from violence, the rewards of liberty, and the hope for a better life."
Where does it become a strategic advantage to promote democracy in the Middle East ? It rests on a widely held premise that democracies rarely wage war on each other .A democratic Middle East ;would be a prosperous Middle East and would cease being a breeding ground for people who want to fly planes into our buildings . Bush makes the assumption that the people of the Middle East are ready to join the modern world .
|
| |
|
Your Options |
Additional Options are only visible when you login! !
|
|
|
|