Amazon.com Widgets

Could Iraq become a stable and genuinely independent country without the intervention of war?

  • I totally agree... they could have become more stable on their own!

    Americans spend too much time worrying about things that have nothing to do with them. Such as this war. Personally this was one of the most pointless wars Americans have ever entered. After 10 years of fighting, trillions upon trillions of dollars dumped into it, thousands dead... NOTHING HAS CHANGED! Iraqi people are still crazy, they don't want us there and they continue killing us. Honestly killing Saddam was one of those things where its good but its also really bad. Killing him was good on the aspect where there is no more pointless massacres but there was order... whereas now, all hell has broken loose! I think if America never got involved they could have figured out what works for them, instead of the US trying to tell them how to live.

  • Iraq could become an stable and independent country given several years to stabilize an economy that corresponds to the country's cultural values.

    Excessive military spending on the part of the US has yet to achieve the goal of establishing a stable and independent country in Iraq. In addition to using funds that would otherwise be used to improve the status of US citizens, American military intervention in Iraq has entirely destabilized any economy that Iraq previously had without providing measurable benefits.

    Posted by: UgliestMarcelo
  • I agree that Iraq could become a stable and independent country.

    Under any democracy I think a country of the people will survive. After all it is what the majority wants. The dictatorship has ended and now the Iraqi's are faced with a future of uncertainty. I think given the chance they would be able to prove to the world that they are capable of being stable and independent.

    Posted by: StripperMor
  • Iraq could become an independent country without the intervention of war, because it can be seen happening in other countries.

    Iraq could have become a independent country without the intervention of war. As we are seeing in many countries today, the people are standing up and being recognized in countries that currently oppress them. I think that if the war did not happen, Iraqi's would have taken care of the situation themselves, without intervention.

    Posted by: GiffCooled
  • Yes, I believe Iraq can become a stable and independent country without war, because it is the ongoing war itself that is making it unstable.

    I very much believe that Iraq can become a stable and genuinely independent country without the intervention of war. I believe that if anything, war is making Iraq unstable. With the constant threat to civilian life and their beliefs, they have no chance to make the changes they need to stabilize themselves. A nation can not succeed with fear of attack in their hearts and minds.

    Posted by: EdgeI4w
  • I think the only way for Iraq to become a stable country is without war.

    A country at war is in fact the antithesis of a stable country and the only way for it to become such is by withdrawing troops and letting Iraq find the best way forward for itself.

    Posted by: NatBIab
  • Anything is possible with enough effort.

    While I do believe this can be done without war, I don't actually see it happen without this intervention. Technically Iraq was 'stable' before Saddam was ousted by the coalition forces, but that 'stability' was an illusion. It is hard to imagine an easily successful attempt to override someone like Saddam Hussein to bring true stability to a nation.

    Posted by: MariaR
  • It is possible that Iraq could become stable on its own as anything is possible...is it likely? Is the cost worth the risk?

    Historically the United States does more harm than good when it invades or "defends" other nations and we pay for generations, as do the citizens of that nation...it is a tricky situation to handle the events of other countries-more often we are damned if we do and damned it we don't!

    Posted by: MarsBIue
  • I think Iraq could become a stable and genuinely independent country without the intervention of war because war creates its own instability and chaos.

    I believe that war is inherently destructive and causes instability, for instance, through the mass migration of refugees and internally displaced peoples. I also believe that war has the potential to destroy the best and brightest people in a generation, as well as any existing infrastructure, leaving Iraq worse off.

    Posted by: g0000ga
  • Could Iraq become a stable and genuinely independent country without the intervention of war? No! Their Supreme Leader President Ali Hoseini-Khamenei has shown that he will not conform to the demands of the United Nation.

    President Ali Hoseini-Khamenei has made it clear to the world that he intense to build a nuclear bomb, and he and his government have refused the United Nations' request to stop the processing of the raw materials to use in the creation of a weapon of mass destruction. President Ali Hoseini-Khamenei has made his feelings and intentions very clear when it comes to the United States. At this time it will take military intervention to keep President Ali Hoseini-Khamenei from creating a nuclear weapon and using that weapon on those he deems to be his enemies.

    Posted by: LimpingChauncey64
  • While I believe that Iraq has already been a genuinely independent country, thanks to its oil reserves, I do not believe that it will ever become stable due to in-fighting that seemingly has no solution.

    I believe that Iraq has already been financially independent, thanks to its natural oil resources, but I don't think that anything can be done, war or no war, to resolve the historical social and religious conflicts within the country to help it to become stable.

    Posted by: ToughEfrain26
  • I do not think that Iraq is going to become a stable and independent country, with or without war.

    While I do believe that intervention of war is in the best interest of Iraq, for it to become a free and independent democratic country, I do not believe it is going to happen. Furthermore, I don't think it would happen without the intervention of war, either. A little coercion can help, but the people of Iraq have to want it as a team, and this is not going to happen. Furthermore, if we back away and let them make their own decisions, it will just go back to the way it was before, which is even worse.

    Posted by: ToyMatt
  • I believe that any country under a dictatorship has to go through a major change in order shift its entire political, social, and economic direction.

    I believe that any country under a dictatorship has to go through a major change in order shift its entire political, social, and economic direction. Unfortunately, this type of shift seldom comes after war. However, there isn't any other obvious trigger for change.

    Posted by: AwfulJacinto96
  • No, I believe that Iraq would stay an unstable country if not for the war, because it is all they know.

    Iraq is a third-world country that has lived in turmoil for many many years. Turmoil is, and has been, all they know. If there had not been a war, they would not have worked to change the demographics of how people are treated, how they live, or how they handle various situations. With this, I believe Iraq would never become a stable and genuinely independent country, without the intervention of war.

    Posted by: SleekTom
  • No, I do not think Iraq can become a stable and independent country without the intervention of war.

    Honestly, I don't think within the next millennium that Iraq will become stable and independent. Nice try U.S., but this is just one thing you aren't going to win. However, without us going over there and attempting to help, then it would be worse. I still don't think its our place to venture into, but still. The situation has gotten better.

    Posted by: LorenaH
  • Iran never become genuine country, first the people should change.

    The mind set of people in Iraq is different. People think that they should live like rulers, as if they are king's. Moreover the kids from their childhood they have started to adopt cruel nature which is leading to drastic results.

    Posted by: Purf3ctBard
  • I think Iraq is too far gone to warrant solving their problems independently.

    Iraq, in my view, is in shambles. They need a militaristic presence to keep the structure they already have established. If there was no military intervention, the terrorist groups would run unchecked and there's really no telling what could happen from that. We could end up with another 9-11, and I don't think anybody wants that.

    Posted by: StudPadg
  • Iraq could not become a stable and independent country without the intervention of war.

    Although war is the only way for Iraq to become a stable and independent country, that does not mean that the U.S. should force our customs and values upon the Iraqi people. We should help them rid their nation of terrorist groups and help rebuild infrastructure. We cannot simply leave when the fighting is over. When we rebuild we should respect the opinions of the Iraqi people and allow them to create the type of government they see most fit for their country.

    Posted by: jeffdaniels

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.