4 ms·

The original justification famously turned out to be complete nonsense, but Iraqi citizens are better off today than they were in 2002. That came with a huge co

The original justification famously turned out to be complete nonsense, but Iraqi citizens are better off today than they were in 2002. That came with a huge cost, mostly born by Iraqi citizens, but it is true.

cmrdporcupine 5y ago
I'd like to hear that claim (better off today) confirmed by an Iraqi, or a statistically significant % of them, before I accept it.
- bilbo0s 5y ago
  I think the honest answer is that, like most claims about others, it's true for some, but probably not for all. It's hard to make the claim that every Iraqi is better off. That claim is obviously baloney. But we can say that some are better off. It's clearly debatable by reasonable people whether or not a war was needed to make that group of people better off? Trying to be objective myself, I'm willing to concede it may not have been. But others might disagree.
gmuslera 5y ago
The surviving Iraqi citizens may or not be better. Once you are dead doesn't matter if things got better anyway. There are pretty big numbers in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War and then you should start counting the millions that were displaced, which situation may not be the best.
calsy 5y ago
That is absolutely not true at all. Dropping bombs on things does not make them better. Large cities that were home to millions of people were bombed, vital utilities like power and water were 'taken out' for strategic purposes. Airports were destroyed, hospitals and schools accidentally bombed. The country fell into civil war. There are still many places that lack basic utilities like running water that existed prior to the 'liberation'. It is still a powder keg of factions fighting that include soldiers from neighbouring countries who have crossed the border.
- cmrdporcupine 5y ago
  Yep and arguably it all set off a powder keg in Syria, too. And gave the regime in Iran more hegemony in the region. I don't see any wins. None.

cmrdporcupine 5y ago

I'd like to hear that claim (better off today) confirmed by an Iraqi, or a statistically significant % of them, before I accept it.

bilbo0s 5y ago
I think the honest answer is that, like most claims about others, it's true for some, but probably not for all. It's hard to make the claim that every Iraqi is better off. That claim is obviously baloney. But we can say that some are better off. It's clearly debatable by reasonable people whether or not a war was needed to make that group of people better off? Trying to be objective myself, I'm willing to concede it may not have been. But others might disagree.

gmuslera 5y ago

The surviving Iraqi citizens may or not be better. Once you are dead doesn't matter if things got better anyway. There are pretty big numbers in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War and then you should start counting the millions that were displaced, which situation may not be the best.

calsy 5y ago

That is absolutely not true at all. Dropping bombs on things does not make them better. Large cities that were home to millions of people were bombed, vital utilities like power and water were 'taken out' for strategic purposes. Airports were destroyed, hospitals and schools accidentally bombed. The country fell into civil war. There are still many places that lack basic utilities like running water that existed prior to the 'liberation'. It is still a powder keg of factions fighting that include soldiers from neighbouring countries who have crossed the border.

cmrdporcupine 5y ago
Yep and arguably it all set off a powder keg in Syria, too. And gave the regime in Iran more hegemony in the region. I don't see any wins. None.