OK... I'm ignoring the bollocks DirtyDishSoap has been spouting, because it is obviously childish, ignorant and uneducated (and makes absolutely no sense - convert them to Christianity? Cold War?)...
But I would like to deal with the contention (by Backglass and others) that the violence in Iraq is solely down to foreign presence there.
There are numerous and varied splits and grudges between elements of the Iraqi population, as well as in relation to other Muslim nations, and resistance to the occupation is only one of them.
Barunt, for one, has managed to completely ignore the incredibly divisive split within the Muslim world of Shia and Sunni Muslims. To say that they are entirely united in their opposition to those who work with 'the great satan' is entirely ridiculous and shows an ignorant black-and-white view of the world. The Sunni Muslim minority previously held power of the Shiite majority, and now the tables have been turned. Shia Muslims are now in power and this alienates the Sunni. Although there are elements of both groups fighting the occupation, there are also significant elements fighting each other for control of the country and of local areas. Previously mixed neighbourhoods are rapidly becoming segregated, with Sunni and Shia separating. Shia death squads are prowling the streets executing Sunni men not because they are somehow 'in league' with the Americans but because they are Sunni. Some see it as the rumblings of ethnic cleansing. Do we really want to have the blood of a genocide on our hands if we leave Iraq now?
We can also look at the Kurdish north, long subdued and abused by Saddam, which would move for separatism as soon as the last American left the country. The Kurds are not Arabs, and they do not consider themselves united in any way with those in the rest of Iraq. They do, however, consider themselves a nation whose people are, in reality, part of Turkey, Syria and Iran as well as Iraq. Turkey, for one, is very much scared of the possibility of a Kurdish uprising to unite with a nationalised Kurdish movement in Iraq if the Americans leave. Iran may have a tighter hold on its Kurdish population, but the same issue does exist there. This is an example of how sectarian divisions in Iraq will not just effect the country itself.
It is a mixed up situation, and there is certainly a great deal of violence directed at the occupation, but you cannot categorically dismiss the myriad causes of sectarian violence in Iraq.
BK Barunt wrote:Basically though, i say enough of our young men have died - let them fend for themselves.
This is what makes me the most fucking angry... We went in and caused this conflict. We created the insurgency and we destabilised the country to the very brink of civil war. However many of your young men die fighting in Iraq, it pails in comparison to the civilians losing their lives even now - around
3000 US soldiers compared to anywhere between
70,000 - 600,000 Iraqi citizens. Do you think when we leave that figure will just disappear? No. it will escalate. Their blood is on our hands already, and it will be all over our fucking arms if we pull out just because our golden boys are dying out there.
We started it, rightly or wrongly, and we should finish it, else we'll have a sea of blood at our door. 'Leaving them to it' is not an option. Not by any stretch.