3
3
0
I refuse to accept the growing commentary that the sacrifices made in Iraq were in vain. I am working on an opinion piece on the subject, and would love to hear from the community. While "Winning the peace" and "accomplishing the specified missions" are part of why these sacrifices were not in vain (in my opinion). I would enjoy hearing from others on the subject. Those that made the ultimate sacrifice no longer have a voice in the media, and I would like to say why I think their sacrifice was noble, pure, and perhaps as far from in vain as possible.
Army
Navy
Air Force
Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF)
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 9
3
3
0
There are probably some good historical parallels to the Korean and Vietnam wars from a strategic standpoint.
I'll talk to some of the guys I served in Iraq with to see if there are any pertinent stories that might help.
I'll talk to some of the guys I served in Iraq with to see if there are any pertinent stories that might help.
(3)
(0)
CPT Dave Shephard
LTC (Join to see) did a lot of economic development for the area our unit was deployed to, maybe he has some good stories that might be relevant.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
I feel they may have been. The questions that I don't have answers to are: Were the goals, based on the circumstances we went into Iraq under, achievable? Is establishing democracy in an Islamic country plausible? Were the resulting effects of disrupting the regional power base what we wanted and expected? Until I can come to terms with the answers to these questions, I don't have positive vibes on what it is we did there.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
The problems with Iraq began when Paul Bremmer replaced Jay Garner as the envoy to Iraq and dismantled the Iraqi military. That made the insurgency in Iraq swell from a rag tag minority to a large number of trained soldiers.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
SSG Pete Fleming
The following is my opinion (I love history and such) I know some might agree some won’t… This is a cliff noted version of how I see the whole situation (again my opinion as I see the facts)… However, it isn’t as simple as Bush lied or whatever people like to say. Was going to war in Iraq a mistake? Did we go for the wrong reason(s)? Was it mishandled? These are question historians will debate. Armchair generals and stateside politicians will point fingers and claim this or that…
First off, contrary to what anyone says it wasn’t Bush’s fault (nor his daddy, Bush SR). The middle has been a misunderstood issue back before even Alexander the Great marched through or the Romans. Islam came later, followed by the crusades and then the Ottoman Empire.
This is where the true root of the problem comes in… America was founded on European concepts (especially Western Europe). We don’t understand tribal concepts, religion division (outside of politics), and we try to blend entire areas into one culture.
However, America didn’t cause this one (we didn’t become a true international power until WWII). When the Great War (WWI) ended the European allies (chiefly France and Great Britain) carved up the Middle East. The same way they carved up the America’s, Africa , and Asia…by geographic and natural resource boundaries, with no regard to tribal/cultural boundaries. Thus, sowing the seeds for a century of future problems. After the WWII the European Empire gradually gave back territories, based on the lines draw up earlier. Around that time (and before) American oil companies had huge interests in the region, which was threatened by the newly independent nations.
That’s when we got involved dabbling in their politics. Resulting in the Iranian revolution, and the Iran Iraq War, where we backed Iraq (these are just a few instances but relate to the main topic). Saddam was a loose cannon and power hungry invaded Kuwait. Everyone (almost the entire world) support the UN led ‘invasion’. Even the Iraqi people seemed supportive. We got to about 50 miles from Baghdad when we were told to stop. That was the UN (not daddy Bush). For the next 10 years we enforce no fly zones. Saddam repeatedly failed to cooperate and comply with the terms of the UN Resolution and continually targeted aircraft patrolling the no-fly zone. He also continued to harass his own people, especially the Kurds and the Shi’ites. He refused to comply with the weapons inspectors and it was perceived that Iraq potentially had chemical weapons and ties to terrorist organizations.
On this we invaded (without UN sponsorship). Regardless the amount, Iraq had WMD (was known to use them on his own people.) Do a little research there were ties to terrorist organizations in Iraq (but they are in every nation). However, something to consider… There was a reason why the UN didn’t condemn our invasion. The UK (and a lot of other nations) supported and followed us in for more than just our word. Despite the reasons it was justified if for no other reason than failure to comply with the terms of the UN resolutions.
Unlike the first time they didn’t surrender in mass, instead they stripped off their uniforms and blended in with society (the police as well). This where we screwed up. We should have cooperated with those military/police leaders who loved their country but hated Saddam. We should not have disbanded the Iraq military/police (which we then recreated and resupplied). Our biggest mistake was arrogance, the UN failed to support us going in, once it was over they offered to take over. We should have said ok, all yours. I truly believe all the ‘insurgency’ and attacks would have happened but it would have been the UN’s problem not ours. We could have comeback to help cleanup… instead it was our mess and our cleanup. Because by the classic definition of war, we won, when Bush stood on the battle shouting ‘victory’, he was right. The military collapsed, the government toppled, we were waving our flag in Baghdad. I remember walking downtown Baghdad without a helmet… then a short time later it sparked. A few holdouts, here and small IED there and it grew and grew… Then comes the politics, rules of engagement, and all the crap that hampers operations, allowing Iraq to get out of hand.
What is happening in Iraq was inevitable. That is part of the reason that Saddam was left in power the first time. We don’t understand tribal lines, religious lines, we see and understand geographic lines.
Now as for it all being in vain… if we allow it to become a radical Islamic state like Iran, yes it will have been all for nothing. If we go back in the cost will be too great. If we do nothing the whole region could dissolve into chaos.
The real problem with modern warfare, and the way we fight is simple. We fight by rules. When the war is over we don’t seize thier territory and resources we rebuild the nation and leave, though we do maintain a political influence. The Middle East doesn’t follow that concept. Regardless of the fact that we were rebuilding their road, their infrastructure, schools, and hospitals, we were the invader. Plus we push our western ideas of equality and freedom in a part of the world that has never (never) experienced that.
If we had fought Germany (again) and won the outcome would have been different. Even if we fought the Russians (ignore the nuclear option) and won the outcome would have been different. If they fought us and won again the outcome would be different. Going by current rules of how we fight wars, once the war was over (except a few holdouts) the war is over. We clean up, shake hand and go home.
Not in the Middle East. Every Veteran who served in Iraq or Afghanistan (or any war/conflict) should be proud of your service and what you did while there. Because once it’s over the politicians will mess it up anyway. I am proud of my overall conduct and the conduct of my subordinates while serving and so no it wasn’t in vain… but was mismanaged. (Just my opinion)
First off, contrary to what anyone says it wasn’t Bush’s fault (nor his daddy, Bush SR). The middle has been a misunderstood issue back before even Alexander the Great marched through or the Romans. Islam came later, followed by the crusades and then the Ottoman Empire.
This is where the true root of the problem comes in… America was founded on European concepts (especially Western Europe). We don’t understand tribal concepts, religion division (outside of politics), and we try to blend entire areas into one culture.
However, America didn’t cause this one (we didn’t become a true international power until WWII). When the Great War (WWI) ended the European allies (chiefly France and Great Britain) carved up the Middle East. The same way they carved up the America’s, Africa , and Asia…by geographic and natural resource boundaries, with no regard to tribal/cultural boundaries. Thus, sowing the seeds for a century of future problems. After the WWII the European Empire gradually gave back territories, based on the lines draw up earlier. Around that time (and before) American oil companies had huge interests in the region, which was threatened by the newly independent nations.
That’s when we got involved dabbling in their politics. Resulting in the Iranian revolution, and the Iran Iraq War, where we backed Iraq (these are just a few instances but relate to the main topic). Saddam was a loose cannon and power hungry invaded Kuwait. Everyone (almost the entire world) support the UN led ‘invasion’. Even the Iraqi people seemed supportive. We got to about 50 miles from Baghdad when we were told to stop. That was the UN (not daddy Bush). For the next 10 years we enforce no fly zones. Saddam repeatedly failed to cooperate and comply with the terms of the UN Resolution and continually targeted aircraft patrolling the no-fly zone. He also continued to harass his own people, especially the Kurds and the Shi’ites. He refused to comply with the weapons inspectors and it was perceived that Iraq potentially had chemical weapons and ties to terrorist organizations.
On this we invaded (without UN sponsorship). Regardless the amount, Iraq had WMD (was known to use them on his own people.) Do a little research there were ties to terrorist organizations in Iraq (but they are in every nation). However, something to consider… There was a reason why the UN didn’t condemn our invasion. The UK (and a lot of other nations) supported and followed us in for more than just our word. Despite the reasons it was justified if for no other reason than failure to comply with the terms of the UN resolutions.
Unlike the first time they didn’t surrender in mass, instead they stripped off their uniforms and blended in with society (the police as well). This where we screwed up. We should have cooperated with those military/police leaders who loved their country but hated Saddam. We should not have disbanded the Iraq military/police (which we then recreated and resupplied). Our biggest mistake was arrogance, the UN failed to support us going in, once it was over they offered to take over. We should have said ok, all yours. I truly believe all the ‘insurgency’ and attacks would have happened but it would have been the UN’s problem not ours. We could have comeback to help cleanup… instead it was our mess and our cleanup. Because by the classic definition of war, we won, when Bush stood on the battle shouting ‘victory’, he was right. The military collapsed, the government toppled, we were waving our flag in Baghdad. I remember walking downtown Baghdad without a helmet… then a short time later it sparked. A few holdouts, here and small IED there and it grew and grew… Then comes the politics, rules of engagement, and all the crap that hampers operations, allowing Iraq to get out of hand.
What is happening in Iraq was inevitable. That is part of the reason that Saddam was left in power the first time. We don’t understand tribal lines, religious lines, we see and understand geographic lines.
Now as for it all being in vain… if we allow it to become a radical Islamic state like Iran, yes it will have been all for nothing. If we go back in the cost will be too great. If we do nothing the whole region could dissolve into chaos.
The real problem with modern warfare, and the way we fight is simple. We fight by rules. When the war is over we don’t seize thier territory and resources we rebuild the nation and leave, though we do maintain a political influence. The Middle East doesn’t follow that concept. Regardless of the fact that we were rebuilding their road, their infrastructure, schools, and hospitals, we were the invader. Plus we push our western ideas of equality and freedom in a part of the world that has never (never) experienced that.
If we had fought Germany (again) and won the outcome would have been different. Even if we fought the Russians (ignore the nuclear option) and won the outcome would have been different. If they fought us and won again the outcome would be different. Going by current rules of how we fight wars, once the war was over (except a few holdouts) the war is over. We clean up, shake hand and go home.
Not in the Middle East. Every Veteran who served in Iraq or Afghanistan (or any war/conflict) should be proud of your service and what you did while there. Because once it’s over the politicians will mess it up anyway. I am proud of my overall conduct and the conduct of my subordinates while serving and so no it wasn’t in vain… but was mismanaged. (Just my opinion)
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
I am an OIF Vet. If those who say these things are judging from the current situation of ISIS, they may feel they are valid as the Country is again in chaos. Let us remember that a myriad of top ranking Officers told Pres. Obama NOT to pull all the Troops out of Iraq. He did so, as with many of his decisions, on his own for political reasons. So be it! My three times there I saw a country growing in hope and coming from a dark place. We had to keep the lid on many aspects, but, I firmly believe that given more time they would have formed a course of action which fit their personalities. No sacrifice is in vain when the fact that a child can sleep in peace without the fear the Secret Police would knock on the door at 0100hrs., take his Mother out in front and put a 9MM round in her head in front of all of the Family. Ask an Iraqi who has come to America what they think. Then stand by for some real education.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I deployed 3 times to Iraq, and every day i say it was wordy. My Mom in her last few days of life told me. "you did what you like and help some one else". That is a wordy cause. I'm in uniform for ones simple reason, To protect, To Help a person in need, that is the American way.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
The sacrifices weren't made in vain... They were they were rendered 'in vain.' It burns me up every morning when I open my eyes and when I go to sleep. Every son wishes he could have one last conversation with his dad after he is dead and mine would be to ask my father how he dealt with the way Vietnam turned out.... another war with similar conclusions due to the same malfeasance from the same people.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
We have lost only one hometown young man to the conflict in IRAQ, his mother was behind me in church this morning. I will always miss him and I run the marathon named after him every year and buy every shirt to support his posthumous charity. We need to be there. If we had never left, would we have ISIS now?
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
The best response to this question that I have heard is "We were winning when I left"
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google