african countries...who?

I have a problem with the government systems all around the world, but especially ours.
The USA is supposedly "giving Iraq democracy" and they don't want to leave until "the job is done" or "the war is over" people who truly believe in these statements are in my opinion crazy. There is nothing to win.

if our government really truly wanted to help out nations and human kind we would be in Africa or Asia. The fact is that there is truly more violence due to government control in Africa then there is in the middle east.
Lets for example take Darfur. People are dying for no good reason. and if our country wanted to give itself to a cause...pick one that actually is a cause...not a way of gaining profits.

Welcome to the forum. If you could, register your account, so you can keep posting and stuff. As for why we don't intervene in Africa? Humanitarian-wise, we do contribute as part of the UN (and have peacekeepers in Somalia), but as for replacing the governments like we did in Iraq, that's another story. If we used terrible government as a justification to replace a government, we'd be forever at war, changing the governments of almost every country on that continent. So many of them are corrupt to the core, and I could pull up countless articles of militias, civilian displacement and murder, and dictators.

That's not a great or well-backed explanation of governments in Africa, but the point is, we went into Iraq to do more than replace a dictator and spread democracy. Bush was saying, "They have WMDs!", not, "They're a dictatorship!" Considering that Cheney heads Halliburton (who got lots of govt contracts for Iraq), and Iraq has lots of oil, and no WMDs were found, and a ton of people in Congress (both sides) approved of it, the reasons for our presence there aren't so easy to determine. It's easy to take these things and say, "Bush is corrupt! He did this to benefit himself!" But, we don't know that, and it's very possible that Bush had good intentions when he planned the invasion.

So, essentially, we went into Iraq with inaccurate information, overthrew their government, and are putting a democracy up so the people don't suffer under the hands of religious fanatics. Think we should pull out and not make sure they're ok? Think I'm crazy for thinking this way? Back up your claim with reasons, so that I know why you think this is crazy, and can consider those reasons for myself. Granted, given the lack of WMDs, Iraq seems like a waste, but we can't duck out and leave these people with a crap government. We already went in, and there's no changing that or the fact that we are responsible to those people to restore their country.

I do think however, that we should get involved in Africa...only in countries seeking aid, because most of them don't want any foreign ex-colonial powers near them.

But we should help fledgling democracies in Africa who are trying to better their countries...and I do believe that Darfur is BULLSHIT and i cant accept that we are not doing anything about it.

I agree that it’s not crazy to still be in Iraq and that maybe we should get involved in Africa. However, we need to exercise caution when getting involved in even more conflicts.

First, I believe the US was right to go to and remain in Iraq. The intelligence at the time said all signs point to WMDs. Anybody with a logical thought process would want to put a stop to that before anything bad happened. Even though it turned out the intelligence was inaccurate, how can we blame the president and only him? He is not the one who gathers the information; he only knows what he is told.

As for not leaving until “the war is over,” I mostly agree with the latter opinions on that as well. Yes, we went in and got rid of the old government, but we can’t leave the rest of the country hanging. If the US were to leave before Iraq was ready, the old government could easily come back into power. Without the aid of the US, the inexperienced Iraqi police/soldiers and politicians would probably be overpowered. The new government is in its beginning stages, as it takes a while to perfect a good system (obviously “perfect” is not meant to be taken as literal perfection, considering there are no “perfect” governments), and if the US left now, it would be detrimental to the progress of the country.

Last for the Iraq subject, it also doesn’t help when everyone here in America publically says the war is ridiculous and “people are dying for no good reason.” This is the kind of stuff that lowers an army’s morale, and from past wars/battles/etc we know morale can make a huge impact on the outcome of a conflict. Plus, they are dying for a cause. They are dying for freedom and progress; it may be for another country, but that just shows their bravery even more. When people say they are dying for no reason, they are dismissing this.

On the subject of Africa, I also agree that the US should try to do something in extreme cases. The things that are happening in Darfur are absolutely atrocious. Apart from Darfur, I also agree that we should only help countries seeking aid; no need kicking the door down where we’re not welcome. Also, the US should be very careful even when helping a country. That could easily turn into another “Iraq situation,” where all of a sudden everyone changes their minds and are like “why are we ever over there?!” and the president who made the decision is deemed villainous, like Bush. I also think that before we help too many more countries, we need to sort out our own problems first. We are obviously not profiting much from anything these days, seeing the state of our economy. If we go into another country, it will just cost us much more money, which we obviously don’t really have.

Another thing the US needs to remember is that we are not the “world police.” Yes, bad things happen. Can we stop them all? No, but we can stop a few. We don’t have to resources to save every country. Conflicts in the world can be compared to the game of Risk. If you spread your units thin over a larger area, it is easier for a more concentrated opponent to attack and defeat you. Even if you get to the end of the game and it seems as though you have victory at your fingertips and you take that chance, an opposing army randomly gets like 22 backup units and they win everything. As a country that is involved in many ordeals, the Unites States has to be more careful about how many things they become involved with. They should only concentrate on a few at a time to ensure success.

Yes, I also agree that the US needs to stop acting like the world police. However, sometimes our policing can help another nation out. While I don't agree with why we went into Iraq in the first place, and in all honesty I wish we hit Iran first as they have been actually outright threatening us and flaunting it, I will say that now that we are in Iraq we must stay and get the job done. The people there need a good government before we can leave. One thing I will say is that we should not be spending nearly as much as we have been, especially if Iraq has a surplus. That isn't to say I don't support the troops. The troops need funding and such, but they can get it from two sources. If our government has helped fund the Iraqi army that is allied with our own, then the Iraqi surplus can also help to fund both our troops and their own if only a little.

On the subject of Africa, I am appalled by the fact nothing is being done in Darfur. With all the political ads and causes for Darfur only for our government to essentially ignore the issue and concentrate on countries that they have deemed "terrorist hideouts" and all that bull is insane. Darfur has people killed every day for no reason other than utter chaos. We claim to help nations that need it but then ignore the ones that fight constantly. The only explanation I can give for this, or rather two explanations, is because one there haven't been any major terrorist attacks done by an African or African-American and two because they have nothing to offer us economically. It is the fact that we are a capitalist society that we will only go into other countries if it is for the benefit of corporations. I use fact in describing out society, not our actions as that is simply my opinion. But really, did you notice how in Iraq there we a lot of photos taken of the burning oil refineries and pumps and people proclaiming something along the lines of "ZOMG WTF THEY DOING?!?!11?" in all the comments to them? This is because our country made it a point to secure the oil refineries and pumps. Going into Darfur would yield no such photos, and in fact most photos would likely be deemed offensive to most people due to the atrocities on human life done there.

I know I'm not making much sense with what I just said above, but it's kind of hard for me to word especially since I don't really know much about what's going on in Darfur...and actually no one does as that isn't much of a concern to the media or politicians in general.