Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. PC
      2. Gameplay
      3. Missions
      4. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Gameplay
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
      4. Frontier Pursuits
    1. Crews & Posses

      1. Recruitment
    2. Events

    1. GTA Online

      1. Diamond Casino & Resort
      2. DLC
      3. Find Lobbies & Players
      4. Guides & Strategies
      5. Vehicles
      6. Content Creator
      7. Help & Support
    2. Grand Theft Auto Series

    3. GTA 6

    4. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    5. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA IV Mods
    6. GTA Chinatown Wars

    7. GTA Vice City Stories

    8. GTA Liberty City Stories

    9. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA SA Mods
    10. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA VC Mods
    11. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA III Mods
    12. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    13. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption

    2. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. News

    2. Forum Support

    3. Site Suggestions

Sign in to follow this  
SPMovies

The Iraq War

Recommended Posts

SPMovies

Hello, I was wondering whats everybodies views on the Iraq War? Personally I'm not sure. I'm very smart with wars or close to wars stuff aswell as world polictics but Im not smart with how the world works economically. Personally I think Iraq was justified even though from my standpoint it helped drive down our economy greatly. The reason I think this is because history always rewrites itself, and in 20 years this war may have done so good for us aswell as Iraq and the Middle East. We also dont know if 20 years from now we find evidence of a WMD in Iraq and then everyone will be happy we did what we did.

 

So, whats your views on this war?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
patsfan4life

I think US shouldn't have been the only country there. The Iraq war is a UN problem. So how is it fair that the US has to do everything, take the economic fall, lose soldiers, and not even get compensation. If I was there I would at least take over the oil wells there to offset the economic losses of being in Iraq.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SPMovies
I think US shouldn't have been the only country there. The Iraq war is a UN problem. So how is it fair that the US has to do everything, take the economic fall, lose soldiers, and not even get compensation. If I was there I would at least take over the oil wells there to offset the economic losses of being in Iraq.

I agree with pretty much everything you said. But I also think that this whole thing 20 years from now will be a great American victory. Like I said, history rewrites itself every day because every day something changes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Crunch
I think US shouldn't have been the only country there. The Iraq war is a UN problem. So how is it fair that the US has to do everything, take the economic fall, lose soldiers, and not even get compensation. If I was there I would at least take over the oil wells there to offset the economic losses of being in Iraq.

I agree with pretty much everything you said. But I also think that this whole thing 20 years from now will be a great American victory. Like I said, history rewrites itself every day because every day something changes.

Except if the regime crumbles or some extremist party gets elected, which is very likely to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tyler

Alright, here we go.

 

 

From a non-denominational standpoint of, say a Brazilian, the war was a great idea to stop the flow of illegal munitions into government funded terrorist organisations. Secretly America had sold arms to a group native to Iran back in the 80's. This resulted in that group having enough fire-power to have a say in whether or not Saddam stayed in power, so obviously he did what any Dictator would do, funded them and gave them land over farming districts.

 

This of course was bad, because now the terrorists had the ability to gain large militias consisting of trained young adults from across the very poor country. Around 1990, Iraq decided in laymen's terms, that Kuwait didn't need their land or country, and marched troops in to annex them. America decided it was an act of terrorism, and intervened. With the help of America and Britian (For the most part) America 'Trumped' Iraq and sent them back home, then slowly returned back to their respective nations to celebrate.

 

Then on the morning of sept. 11th, 2001, An unknown group of terrorists supposedly funded by Al Qaeda, destroyed the twin towers in New York, New York. This prompted quick response, and the very unintelligent move that bush decided to convey, which was the invasion of Iraq. Nine years, and a sh*t ton of casualties later, and we are reportedly at a peace-time. I can only hope that it lasts.

 

Now, from an American in Congress, they thought more like this. Al Qaeda attacked, let us go invade the country that funded them.

 

Which frankly, cannot work. Terrorism, which was a huge point of this whole war, cannot be traced back to countries any more. Al Qaeda does not operate out of solely Iraq. They have been working out of at least twelve different countries, they have no country to call their own.

 

For future reference, terrorism is going to be a power-hungry countries best friend. A country like Russia, could organise a massive terrorist strike in, say Britain, and if they did it well enough, they could say an unknown group of terrorists did it.

 

As for the WMD, they were left in the arms of whomever can carry them after Saddam was executed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
patsfan4life

Russia would never sponsor terrorism, clearly youve been playing Modern Warfare too much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
bobgtafan

We shouldn't of gone in until we got the support of the U.N, we shouldn't of gone in under the premise of terrorism, we shouldn't of gone in with 2 times less troops needed, we shouldn't of gone in thinking we'd be liberators. I don't falut the whole war I'm just upset with the bush administration's methods of starting it. Saddam killed 300,000 kurds, went to war with Iran, and used bio and chemical weapons; deserved to die. I don't agree it was a full mistake, but the way we did it was. As far as terrorism goes State Sponsered is the worse.

 

State sponsered, this is risky for the state involved because unless they have a nuclear deterrent (like Russia) we'll make it rain death like we did in Afghanistan. An Al-queda that has a full state would be the worse case scenario for America. A full state with infinite recruits, mulitple airstrips, vast terrority, funds, regional allies and easier access to nuclear materials. If I was a congressman in 2003 and they told me Saddam had all of this AND was a genocidal dickwad I would say go to war also.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dingdongs

No reason to have gone there. End of story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dog_day_sunrise

 

Which frankly, cannot work. Terrorism, which was a huge point of this whole war, cannot be traced back to countries any more. Al Qaeda does not operate out of solely Iraq. They have been working out of at least twelve different countries, they have no country to call their own.

 

As for the WMD, they were left in the arms of whomever can carry them after Saddam was executed.

The war in Iraq wasn't anything to do with terrorism- it was to remove the ability for Iraq to produce weapons of mass destruction- which, largely, was exaggerated by the US intelligence agencies (look up "Curveball", who was an Iraqi informer who gave the US much of the information on the NBC capability of Iraq, much of which was false, and then promptly vanished with a large sum of money only to re-surface in Germany). That said, some weapons of mass destruction have been found (though most of them degraded to the point of being useless). There's a very credible theory that most were shipped to Syria in the run-up to the invasion.

 

As for the terrorism aspect- true, you cannot truly target terrorist organisations in one country alone. However, it is fully feasible to target facilities used by terrorists on national soil- for instance, the terrorist training camps run by the Taliban in Afghanistan, or the facilities used by aQ in Yemen and Somalia; deposing the heads of regimes who offer safe havens, supplies and funding to them can help too. For the most part, though, your absolutely right; terrorist organisations are so irregular in their formation and heirarchy that it's often difficult to determine who is leading any cell or part of a cell, much less do anything about them.

 

 

I think US shouldn't have been the only country there. The Iraq war is a UN problem. So how is it fair that the US has to do everything, take the economic fall, lose soldiers, and not even get compensation. If I was there I would at least take over the oil wells there to offset the economic losses of being in Iraq.

The US wasn't the only country there- from memory, the UK, Australia, Denmark, Spain, Ukraine, Netherlends, Japan, Singapore, Poland, Romania, South Korea, Georgia and about 30 others were also engaged in operations and contributed forces there, either during the insurgency or in the initial invasion (or both). And for the record, the principal reason why the operation had to be unilateral was the ability of China and Russia to scupper any military plans- which they promptly would have done as Iraq was a large scale purchaser of Russian military hardware, and China assisted significantly in the construction of much of the infrastructure destroyed after the war.

 

 

Russia would never sponsor terrorism, clearly youve been playing Modern Warfare too much.

What, like the Communist guerillas in Nicaragua? Or perhaps their financing and arming of the PLO during the 70's and 80's? How about supplying KGB agents to train and assist Armenian Marxist terrorist organisations? How about directly conducting terrorist attacks in the 80's in Pakistan in order to try and push them into away from the Afghan Mujahideen that later became the Taliban? Russia has been sponsoring terrorism for decades- not so much in the last 10 years or so, but there have been allegations that the Kremlin supplied and assisted the Bosnian Serb Army in ethnic clensing of Muslims and their associated militias as many had been combatents during the Afghan war?

 

Please. Russia is as great a funder of state terrorism as any other nation, save for perhaps Pakistan.

 

In reference to the original point, most large nations could theoretically conduct a "terrorist" attack on another state's soil- but the difficulty would come in successfully disguising it as just that, especially given that intelligence agencies still have operatives in prolific roles inside the military and governmental machines of most nations. All it takes is one person to leak the real source of an attack and any benefit (though I'm rather doubtful there would be from, say, Russia's side) would be instantly undone and them some.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Josh
We shouldn't of gone in until we got the support of the U.N, we shouldn't of gone in under the premise of terrorism, we shouldn't of gone in with 2 times less troops needed, we shouldn't of gone in thinking we'd be liberators. I don't falut the whole war I'm just upset with the bush administration's methods of starting it. Saddam killed 300,000 kurds, went to war with Iran, and used bio and chemical weapons; deserved to die. I don't agree it was a full mistake, but the way we did it was. As far as terrorism goes State Sponsered is the worse.

You've misunderstood the whole reason why America and their allies declared war. It wasn't at all to do with terrorism it was due to removing a leader which Blair and Bush didn't much like, under the premise that said leader had the capability to actually make and use nuclear weapons. Fair enough he was a bad person but that isn't enough to go to ewar with someone. Look at Iran, Zimbabwe, Egypt. The West knows that these people are horrible bastards but we let them rule without starting a war with them because we simply can't afford the international ramifications of starting wars for no real "proper" reason. So instead we decided to veil it under a thin sheet of nuclear rumours from sources who promptly went AWOL.

 

As for the Iran-Iraq conflict, we will never know who the aggressors were in the first instance. So it's probably best that you don't go around blaming either side as it may have been started by the Iranian assassination attempt on Tariq Aziz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dog_day_sunrise
Fair enough he was a bad person but that isn't enough to go to ewar with someone. Look at Iran, Zimbabwe, Egypt. The West knows that these people are horrible bastards but we let them rule without starting a war with them because we simply can't afford the international ramifications of starting wars for no real "proper" reason. So instead we decided to veil it under a thin sheet of nuclear rumours from sources who promptly went AWOL.

 

As for the Iran-Iraq conflict, we will never know who the aggressors were in the first instance. So it's probably best that you don't go around blaming either side as it may have been started by the Iranian assassination attempt on Tariq Aziz.

Well, strictly speaking you don't need any reason to need to go to war with someone, but I digress. As for targeting other regimes- the justification for targeting Iraq was based on bad intel and a rogue human source. Personally, I think to some extent it was naivity by the British and US administrations in hanging on every word that came out of Iraq regarding WMDs, and partly on the desire of policy makers to make an example of Iraq (as much to demonstrate to Iran what was done to those with illicit weapons programs as anything else)- though both have backfired spectactularly.

 

The Iran-Iraq war was started by the attempted assassination of Tariq Aziz. That said, it's not an excuse for the use of chemical weapons against civilian populations- war crimes- or a the installation of a program to systematically murder Kurds- genocide. A side point- many of the people accused of war crimes in recent history are millitia leaders and insurgent commanders, making their "institutions" difficult to target, whereas governments guilty of doing so are much easier to address. That said, I think the poor handling of the insurgency post-invasion (boots on the ground are worth precisely sh*t-all if you can't establish a foothold amongst the local population) and the completely inability of the Coalition to understand the simmering tribal and religious differences in Iraq that were kept under wraps by Sadaam has kind of put them off any future intervention in the short term. Lots of intel, much of it bad, and lots of money, much of it wasted- and that's before you look into the human casualties. As I failed to make clear in my first post, I have no issue with the Iraq war regardless of it's aims or methodoloy- however, like Afghanistan, I have an issue with how the conflict has been managed- or mismanaged, if I'm honest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.