George Speaks – Iraq

Latest Comment

Blog

By George Berry on 13.11.2023

George Speaks – Iraq

I have a feeling this is going to be another of ‘those’ articles. The kind you read and feel it necessary to shove your opinion without properly reading it. Unfortunately, Iraq has become a massive thorn in my side, or more the sheer stupidity that a lot of people (especially students) angle towards it.

War is bad. Let’s just get that one out of the way. War means death of innocent lives, families torn apart and ultimately nothing is gained at all. But war is necessary. It is necessary for the same reason that socialism fails. Human nature is shit.

Before I ramble on too long, I’ll get to my point. I am sick beyond words of people complaining about Iraq, and screaming from the rooftops that we need to pull our troops out as soon as humanly possible to let the country be free. Think for a second before I continue. Do you think that our troops should just pull out right now, just up and leave?

Think about it. Yes, going to war with Iraq was extremely questionable, and while we can never prove it, the chances are it was for oil. Back then, I agreed with everyone that war was a bad idea. While it is true that Hussein needed to be put to justice, along with his supporters, perhaps a tactical sniper or two could have cleaned that mess up. Still, I don’t have reliable military intelligence to back this up, but then neither did Mr Bush.

But look at it now, the whole place is in a civil war, suicide bombings everywhere, innocent people dying, not because we are there, but because of some holy war. Of course, us taking down the old power caused this struggle but either way terrible things were happening, thousands of people dying and also, which we all too frequently forget, genocide.

So many people have said we should just pull out now. So we pull out, and then what? Let the next wave of lunatics murder their way to power, and continue on their killing spree? We can’t pull out; we need to defend the innocent. There may be a large number of civilian casualties, but nothing in comparison to what would happen if we just upped and left. Why do so many of you claim it isn’t our struggle, our fight? A human being is a human being and before we divided the world up, we were all one.

The situation out there is mind-bogglingly confusing, yet so many of you claim to have the answer, claiming that it is obvious that we should pull out. Pull out and leave this massive mess behind. Sure, it’s not our problem, but these are still human beings and the fact that you don’t care about these innocent people makes me sick to my stomach.

War is terrible, yes, but war is necessary.



Comments

  • “General Franco was murdering civilians, as to was Pinochet. Do you believe we should have intervened in Spain and Chile, respectively, to remove those dictators? I am assuming the thought has not once passed your mind.”

    ANYONE who murders without reason (such as war or self defense) should, in my mind, be killed.

    So yes, Franco and Pinochet, dead.

    So you assumed wrong, but feel free to make more assumptions.

    We should stay there because the second we leave the country will be taken over by military force for another dictatorship.

    We aren’t there for fun, we are now there for democracy, to give the downtrodden what they never had.

    We made this mess, now it needs to be cleaned up.

    By website-entertainment on 18.11.2023

    If you are unhappy with this comment please refer to our terms and conditions and contact us with any any concerns.

  • Lisa, I, like the majority of people, know of our previous history with Saddam Hussein and other states in the Middle East, but two wrongs do not make a right.

    Yes, it was wrong that we sold weapons to Iraq (and Iran) during the 1980s, and yes, such a move was wrong, but heck, that’s the free market for you, weapons manufacturers will always find a way to sell to the highest bidder, regardless of politics. There is no such thing as an ethical arms trade, such a thing does not exist.

    But to correct that wrong with intervention is ridiculous. To set up a false pretense, and then to stay in the country with no exist plan, atleat not an honourable one, is beyond sense. Why should we stay there when the targets of insurgents are NATO troops and private security firms? It makes no sense. Do you believe the country is stable? Where’s the evidence to say that our exist will be a disaster? We have to leave at some time…don’t we? I do hope that your not an advocate of a ‘new’ imperialism for the Middle East.

    The only way we are going to be able to make Iraq stable is by negotiating with the insurgency, by catering to their grievances, and by diplomatic talks. We are not going to resolve the mess in Iraq by firing more bullets, or even bluffing that we will.

    Iraq proves that the ‘doctrine’ of humanitarian intervention is a lost effort at ‘humanising’ militarism.

    By Luke Walter on 17.11.2023

    If you are unhappy with this comment please refer to our terms and conditions and contact us with any any concerns.

  • Britain cannot pretend not to be (part) to blame for this war, and for the millions of people who died before the war under the rule of Sadam Hussein.

    Firstly, we sold Hussein weapons. Weapons that were used to frighten and torture Iraqi people. Thats what England and America do. They sell weapons to other countries, and don’t care what human rights laws are being broken so long as we’re pals with the country.

    Israel anyone? Top for US arms donations, and murdering Palestinians left right and center, whilst hiding behind the holocaust.

    “Without intervention, he would have continued murdering and torturing while we sit by completely ignorant.”

    We were not ignorant. The UN had sanctions on Iraq, basically making it a sealed economy for over 12 years before the war started, stopping vital things such as MEDICINE getting to the Iraqi people. Unicef state that 500,000 Iraqis died directly because of UN sanctions.

    By Lisa Marie Ford on 17.11.2023

    If you are unhappy with this comment please refer to our terms and conditions and contact us with any any concerns.

  • George, by shoving the Charters we lose all credibility for any ‘exceptional’ actions, which I believe, in some cases, that exceptions must be made.

    My concern is humanitarian intervention becoming a rule to solve problems.

    By quoting the 1939 experience, you are quoting an exception, not all dictators are adherents to Hitler’s National Socialism. We should stop using 1939 as an excuse for ‘liberal’ action when ever we feel like it.

    General Franco was murdering civilians, as to was Pinochet. Do you believe we should have intervened in Spain and Chile, respectively, to remove those dictators? I am assuming the thought has not once passed your mind.

    By Luke on 16.11.2023

    If you are unhappy with this comment please refer to our terms and conditions and contact us with any any concerns.

  • Shove charters, by that thinking, you just want to let innocent people be murdered by their government because its none of our business?

    We do have a right to help people the best way we can. The only way to stop a military force affectively is with military force. It sucks but it’s true.

    I’m fairly sure concessions is what made Hitler make bolder and bolder gambles until we realised what girls we had been and decided to actually do something about it.

    By website-entertainment on 15.11.2023

    If you are unhappy with this comment please refer to our terms and conditions and contact us with any any concerns.

  • I think Edwin Starr was right on this one

    By Tom Barker on 14.11.2023

    If you are unhappy with this comment please refer to our terms and conditions and contact us with any any concerns.

  • What right do we have to intervention? None.

    If we attempt to establish such a right, then all we are doing is establishing a right to use agression, a right that will be abused.

    Let’s take Russia’s intervention into South Ossetia. It was condemned by nearly every Western government, yet the pretense for Russia to carry out such an intervention was upon the basis that there was an impending humanitarian crisis in the area. Are you to say that such an intervention by a country outside the NATO sphere is not acceptable?

    We can’t be hawkish in our foreign policy. We can’t accept that a military answer is always the best answer because of ‘human nature.’ Our reason to declare war on Germany in 1939 was not over abuses towards minority groups in Germany, it’s because the extent of Hitler’s ambition was revealed by his invasion of Czechoslovakia, an ambition which the British political class felt a need to contain.

    Humans are not perfect, there is no such thing as perfect governance. But what we must stop is our dictating of the best way to govern. We’re too arrogant to admit the abuses of our own past, yet we like to pass moral judgement on what is in fact relatively new nation-states, ones which are largely un-organic in their make up.

    We may not always like the way other nations govern themselves, but I believe in the international order that is the UN Charter. Dare we violate that Charter- as we have done in Iraq and Kosovo- we are violating the very international order in which we argue that we are fighting for.

    By Luke Walter on 14.11.2023

    If you are unhappy with this comment please refer to our terms and conditions and contact us with any any concerns.

  • “I have a feeling this is going to be another of ‘those’ articles. The kind you read and feel it necessary to shove your opinion without properly reading it”

    Actually George, in terms of keeping a humanitarian presence in Iraq: I couldn’t agree more. I think it would be almost as bad as invading to leave Iraq in the state its now in.

    By chairman on 14.11.2023

    If you are unhappy with this comment please refer to our terms and conditions and contact us with any any concerns.

  • War is necessary. World War Two was necessary: without us declaring war, Hitler would have continued his campaign of genocide unquestioned.

    Humans are not perfect, we can’t all share and work the same, because we are not the same.

    There will always be a reason for war. While it is not glamorous, it is needed.

    Intervention is not unnecessary. Saddam Hussein was evil and needed to be brought to justice, but no-one within Iraq could do it, so again, he would have continued unquestioned.

    Without intervention, he would have continued murdering and torturing while we sit buy completely ignorant.

    That is a disgusting thought that we can just turn a blind eye to this while we can try and help.

    Even if we do not succeed, we tried our best. Nothing ventured nothing gained.

    By website-entertainment on 14.11.2023

    If you are unhappy with this comment please refer to our terms and conditions and contact us with any any concerns.

  • War is not necessary, no where in your article have you said it is necessary. You simply suggest war is part of ‘human nature’, could you please define this concept along more detailed and substantial lines?

    I think Iraq is going to be a mess either way, as is the majority of cases where there the justification is ‘humanitarian intervention.’

    There are few success stories of where a group of nations-in the case of Iraq they were acting unilaterally without UN authorisation-intervene on the supposed basis of their ‘values’ and not for territorial ambition or self-defence.

    Intervention is something that is unnecessary, whilst not all wars can be helped (given the multiple number of disputes in places like the DRC and Somalia), the case of Western states intervening militarily in smaller states is a futile one, and that is what I believe to be unnecessary.

    By Luke Walter on 14.11.2023

    If you are unhappy with this comment please refer to our terms and conditions and contact us with any any concerns.

Post new comment


    Scroll to Top