AOL News has a new home! The Huffington Post.
Click here to visit the new home of Politics Daily!
The Sunni and Shia have been fighting for 1200 years and they will not stop now. The only one who is helped by us getting in this war is Iran. Iran and Iraq were enemies and fought each other. Now with a Shiate majority in Iraq they will join to form a regional super power.
August 22 2010 at 3:11 PM Report abuse Permalink -4 rate up rate down Replyit was a lost cause before it even started
August 22 2010 at 1:33 PM Report abuse Permalink -1 rate up rate down ReplyWHAT PART OF THE IRAQ CONFLICT COULD BE CONSIDERED A SUCCESS?????
August 22 2010 at 12:57 PM Report abuse Permalink -4 rate up rate down ReplyVietnam was the 20th century failure. Iraq is the 21st century failure. The draw down of troops to a peace keeping/non combat role is the intelligent thing to do.
August 22 2010 at 12:36 PM Report abuse Permalink -4 rate up rate down ReplyEXCEPT THEY ARE BEING REPLACED WITH MERCENARIES--LAWLESS--KILL FOR FUN PSYCOS---TOO SICK EVEN FOR THE MILITARY
August 22 2010 at 12:59 PM Report abuse Permalink -5 rate up rate down ReplyThe Iraq was a horrible mistake. Under Saddam, the country was fairly stable, and had a secular government. Now, the religious squabbling will go on forever, it seems. In the long run, I think Iraq is going to look just like Iran - a nominally secular government dominated by the mullahs. The people of Iraq have exchanged a secular dictator for dictatorship by religious fanatics.
August 22 2010 at 12:04 PM Report abuse Permalink -2 rate up rate down ReplyIraq was a terrible waste of human life and resources that like Afghanistan and Nam and Korea should have never happened. Our stated objectives in Iraq was to bring a peaceful democracy to the Middle-east that would be the 'first domino' used to start a democratic revolution in the area, it has failed. Most of the countries there are NOW more than ever against the USA and its form of Democracy as seen by Isreal, Palistine, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and others in the region. The second reason was to gather the oil for USA companies, which too failed as the Dutch, British, and Chinese have all signed contracts with the new government for the oil rights. Third was to get rid of the weapons of Mass Destruction supplied by the USA to Iraq, which both the French, Germans, UN, and American security said were not there, and indeed were not there. Yes, Sadam was a dictator, but his country and his people were growing, prospering, and peaceful, until we the USA got involved. Now we have the families of over 85,000 killed, and the families of over 2,000,000 made homeless, and the families of 30,000,000 all ticked off at us; and we did with with borrowed Chinese Money and at the destruction of the USA economy. So people, who won????
August 22 2010 at 11:58 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplySo 53% of Americans see the Iraq war as a failure. How would they rather have seen it? Would they have preferred a WWII type ending where Al Qaeda terrorists handed over their weapons in an official ceremony? They must have forgotten that we went to Iraq on lie. Our political scene has no equal anywhere on the face of the earth.
August 22 2010 at 11:35 AM Report abuse Permalink -8 rate up rate down ReplySaddam wanted to control ALL the oil fields. First he went to war with Iran and killed hundreds of thousands, when they kept him at bay he went after Kuwait and Saudi Arabia's oil fields first with scuds then with 700 tanks killing hundreds. While in Kuwait he stole most of the $40 billion in war materials we sold them. Saddam was dangerous. His control of the fields would have controlled the oil prices, would have been in control of those countries that depended on that oil. He had to go. As for the WMDs listen to General Sada instead of John Kerry.
August 22 2010 at 11:34 AM Report abuse Permalink +4 rate up rate down ReplyI think many Americans forget how bad Saddam and Iraq really were. It was more than their quest for oil and regional dominance. Remember how corrupt the UN's oil for food program was? Instead of food for Iraqi civilians, it fed hundreds of millions of dollars to Saddam, his sadistic sons, their military, and yes, their temporarily dormant WMD programs. The war was expensive, but don't forget how expensive it would have been to continue to try to "contain" Saddam and his sons. Containment would have been an unsuccessful strategy long term, anyway. Saddam brought the war on himself.
August 22 2010 at 11:48 AM Report abuse Permalink +10 rate up rate down ReplyOne has to understand the reasoning - whether right or wrong - and to allow the military to proceed with its action without the interferrence of government dead-heads. Iraq should have been won in the first 3 years....not eight years later. This is the same as viet Nam - a police action with no definite direction or completion. Iraq could have been taken in the first year - however, those in charge knew nothing of the complex military action requirements. They only wanted Saddam out....a big mistake, because most of the world knew he was a blow hard...and by doing what what done only opened the door for Iran to expedite its programs after Iraq failed to infiltrate Iran.
August 22 2010 at 11:08 AM Report abuse Permalink +13 rate up rate down Replya retired veteran i am. serve during the nam era. got spit by my fellow citizens while on home leave because i was a soldier boy in those days. well nam did no teach us anything and the same goes for iraq some fifty years later. business will go as usual here and around the world. only veterans like myself ask themselves why was that all about and was it necessary. thank you.
August 22 2010 at 11:04 AM Report abuse Permalink +18 rate up rate down ReplyFollow Politics Daily
POPULAR
News From Our Partners



Top News
More News
More on Aol
Local News
More Blog/Sites
Sites and Services
261 Comments