USA Today
A motorcycle in Baghdad laced with nails and ball bearings, exploded just after 9 a.m. in a youth-filled market. The explosion killed 19 and wounded at least 50. "The attack occurred four days before the deadline for U.S. combat troops to withdraw from the cities."
There has been a large amount of violence this week resulting in over two hundred deaths. This raised doubts in the Iraqi forces as to whether they can provide stable security as American forces are slowly being weeded out.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2009-06-26-baghdad-bomb_N.htm
I think that these events should raise suspicion as to whether the Iraqi forces can take on the role of security within their own borders. It is a huge deal for America to step to the side and allow Iraq to fend for itself. I do think America should help out other countries when they are in need due to the fact that we have the ability to do so. However, having said that, there is only so much help we can give. Not every country is meant to have a democracy, no matter how great the idea sounds. I do not think we should extend our stay in Iraq due to the rush of deaths. We have expended many resources and American lives trying to help them. But where do we cross the line?
I'm not sure what you mean by "[n]ot every country is meant to have a democracy." Is there some formula that determines which people can or cannot determine their own destinies? Are you suggesting that some people just need kings or dictators to keep them in line? Statements such as these really need more explanation. One more thing: remember that our armed forces were not in Iraq at its citizen's request, but because our government at the time chose to invade and occupy a sovereign nation.
ReplyDelete