Should I Stay or Should I Go?

When President Bush declared war on Iraq in 2003 few people would have predicted the mess that this action would cause in the future. Today, seven years later, we have begun to see the consequences of his actions. Because of Bush’s decision in 2003 President Obama is facing one of the most crucial decisions of his presidency. On becoming president Obama vowed to have American troops out of Iraq by August of this year. However things have changed since that promise was made and this action is no longer in the best interest of the Iraqi people. When the promise was originally made it was assumed that Iraq would have a stable democratically elected government by now and, as has been shown by other articles in the New York Times, stability is not going to happen any time soon. Yet, the President is planning to stick to his original deadline of August. However, without the American forces there to support the fledgling government in Iraq that the U.S. has tried so hard to create, this government will most likely collapse.

The only government that works is one that has been given legitimacy by the people. Iraq’s government is not recognized by a majority of its people and it continues to lose respect with its many recounts and talks of tampering. During the first election in 2005 only a small amount of Iraqis even voted, how can a government be expected to survive without the support of the people that it is governing? Also, as shown in another New York Times article, violence is still common all around Iraq. The article, published a week ago, spoke specifically about bombings in Iraq that only generated more distrust in the government and showcased the continued actions of Al Qaeda. All of these facts point to an unstable government that has only survived because of American presence. If America was to pull out right now the government would most likely fall, especially because Al Qaeda is always lurking on the fringes, waiting for any opportunity to regain power in Iraq.

However, although the government continues to be unstable, the Iraqi forces have continued to progress and grow into a formidable force. A statement given by a deputy national security advisor stated that recent Iraqi-lead missions show that the Iraqi troops are showing progress and the ability to provide their own security. However, no army, no matter how well trained, is effective without strong leadership. The government that is currently in place right now is nowhere near stable enough to provide the type of leadership needed to effectively use this strong new army. For a long time American forces have been the support for the Iraqi government and the leadership for the Iraqi army, if they were to pull out now the results could be disastrous.

However, while staying in Iraq forever is not the solution to this problem, neither is pulling troops out right now. If the president was willing to enact a more gradual pull out rather than the immediate pull out that he is planning now that would allow more time for the government to gain stability and legitimacy from the people and also the skills to use their army effectively to keep Al Qaeda at bay. The Iraqi people want peace and stability, however they do not feel that the government is providing them the security that they need amidst all of the violence still going on in Iraq. If a gradual pull out were to take place the Iraqi politicians could use the holes left by the American troops to prove to the people that they would do whatever it takes to keep them safe. Also this would give the Iraqi leaders more experience with the troops and they would learn how to utilize them to the Iraqis advantage. Yet, while the Iraqi government would be given these opportunities to prove itself, American troops would be standing by in case of more violence, to continue training the army and to help the Iraqi government become the strong force that it needs to become.

Pressure Pushing Down on Me

RE: Companies Feeling More Pressure to Cut Iran Ties (April 23, 2010)

By Peter Baker

To the Editor:

I found this article really interesting because it showed how America seems to feel the need to step up when the UN fails. I think that this pressure to end ties with Iran will have a great impact on this country. However, whether the impact will be good or bad remains to be seen. Also the effectiveness of this strategy has yet to be determined. On one hand Iran could fold and give up its nuclear aspirations. However on the other hand, not every company in the world is going to cut ties to Iran and therefore Iran will most likely always have the funding that it needs, this could mean that this pressure would have no effect at all. One other outcome however, is that Iran could retaliate against the US violently and cause another war. I think the main question now is: is this sanction worth the risk and will it have the outcome that President Obama is looking for. Also what effect will this sanction, and Iran’s reaction to it have worldwide?

How Could We?

RE: Report Details Torture at Secret Baghdad Prison (April 27, 2010)

By Sam Dagher

To the Editor:

“America is the symbol of democracy, but then you have the abuses at Abu Ghraib,” Mr. Maliki said. “The American government took tough measures, and we are doing the same, so where is the problem and why this raucousness?” Although this entire article was very disturbing this is the part that really shocked me. The acts committed at this prison were atrocious and inhuman, how can we wonder why people from all over the world hate us when we know that they have stories like this to go off of. Not only did we show them that this sort of violence is ok but we gave them a rock solid excuse for committing violence in the future. If America is a democracy and we are a democracy then we can do these horrible things in the name of democracy. I feel like this will have a huge impact over the way that America is viewed by the world. How can we hope to create a peaceful world when all we contribute is violence that breeds hatred?

Instability = a Breeding Ground for Violence

RE: Wave of Fatal Bombins Widens Fissures in Iraq (April 23, 2010)

By Steven Lee Myers

To the Editor:

This article shows how an unstable country is a violent one. I think Americans need to ask our government if we are contributing or causing much of this violence. The article talked about how these bombings were adding to the instability of the government, bombings which were a response to American presence in Iraq and are helping to destabilize the government that Americans are trying to create. Is this the right course of action for the Iraqi people? Or just for America? One man who had been injured by the bombing summed up the people’s feelings nicely, “The politicians are busy forming the government and forgot all about us,” he said. “They are all useless.” It seems like America is only adding to chaos and violence within Iraq, even though that is exactly what we are trying to prevent. I think that stability needs to come from the people for it to have any hope for permanence, yet what are we doing to help that?

Guilty Until Proven Innocent

RE: Jury to Be Anonymous in Trial of Ex-Student Accused of Aiding Al Qaeda (April 26, 2010)

By Benjamin Weiser

To the Editor:

If there is anything that I have learned, it is that history repeats itself. This trial and the wording within the article closely resemble the mood in America during the 1920’s towards immigrants. First of all I think that the jurors have every right to remain anonymous because it would keep their judgment honest because they wouldn’t be afraid that what they had to say would cause them any harm. However I think this whole trial needs to be examined. In the past the fear of immigrants has caused some of the most heinous miscarriages of justice in American History, for example the case of Sacco and Vanzetti; two Italian immigrants who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and paid dearly for that mistake because of fabricated evidence. I’m not saying that Hasmi is either innocent or Guilty, merely that this bias needs to be taken into account and should be eliminated from the article.

There are 2 Sides to Every Story

RE: 2 Officials and 2 Views on Discussing Mideast Peace (April 28, 2010)

By Mark Landler

To the Editor:

When I began reading this piece I was expecting to read something presenting two sides of a particular story, for example the views of an Iraqi and the views of an American on peace in Iraq. However what I found was much different. This whole article was only one side of the Palestinian Israeli story. It made it seem like the Palestinians weren’t even part of the peace negotiations. Only the American view and the Israeli view were presented and so this article was not a fair representation of the situation at all. The article made it seem like the biggest problem for peace in Israel right now is the continued construction in Jerusalem and an Israeli mayor. Not once did the article try to explain why the construction was a problem for peace and to add further insult there was only a brief portion that had anything to do with Palestine at all. This article was horribly biased incredibly uninformative with regard to what the issue really is about and the people who are really affected by the decisions made by these politicians.

On the brink of....Something

RE: An Eviction Stirs Old Ghosts in a Contested City

To the Editor,
This article opens up a lot of questions, but the main one seems to be what is going to happen to Israel because of this? For years the relationship between Israel and Palestine has been anything but friendly. It seems like before there was a chance, no matter how slim, of Israel and Palestine coming to some sort of peaceful end. Now, because of the continued displacement of Palestinian families from their homes, I feel like peace is out of the question, and as one Israeli man put it at the end of the article “It cannot go one way in Jerusalem,” so the question remains as now what is going to happen? Also, how many people will this affect and in what way? The world waits with bated breath for what is going to happen next in Jerusalem.

Double Standard 101

RE: Iranian Authorities Close 2 Opposition Publications (March 2, 2010)
To the Editor:
I originally started reading this article because I was intrigued by the censorship happening in Iran, however looking deeper into the article I found something very troubling. At the end of the article the author mentioned at least 280 workers that have not received payment for months due to “unpaid government debts and a tightening of bank credit”. Then the article went on to mention the 2,000-pound bombs that the Iranian Air-Force was building, testing and refining at the same time. My question now is how the Iranian government can afford these million dollar bombs when it can’t afford to pay its workers? My next question is how long does the government expect to remain in power, considering the recent riots over wages, without paying its workers? I feel like this apparent double standard should be investigated more closely in the future.

Consistency will bring Peace

Re: Afghan Officials Claim Control Over Taliban Area (February 24, 2010)
To The Editor,
When the combined forces chased the Taliban out of Marja, the attitudes of the citizens of this former Taliban stronghold were depicted as ungrateful. However I think that one man interviewed in this article summed up the feelings of the villagers perfectly, He said, “For us, they [the militaries] are not useful. We don’t want them to stay in Marja. We want them to leave. For us both the Taliban and the Marines are the same. They are fighting and killing us. We don’t want either.” How can anyone blame them for this attitude though? For years these people have lived in fear of everything. In their eyes this takeover is not one of peace but merely one group with guns being replaced by another. However I think that a situation like Marja is exactly what this war needs. Everyone, not just the people of Marja, need to see that once a promise is made it will be kept. The Afghan army needs to keep its promise of building schools and clearing the city of anything that could harm the inhabitants. Once the inhabitants see that the Taliban is not their only option for consistent security I believe that the support needed for the troops will be readily given and this war will be able to do what needs to be done to restore peace and security everywhere.

Until Everyone is Free, No One is Free

Re: Iranians Protest Bill on Rights of Women (February 17, 2010)

To The Editor,
There are many preconcieved notions about Islam here in the U.S. One particular notion seems to be that Islam views women as inferior, however that is not necessarily true. The fact of the matter is that because of the flexible nature of Arabic many men have taken Qur'an verses and translated them in a way that best fits their needs. This shows that many times it is not Islam that is the oppressor but the authoritative male figures of Islam that are keeping women inferior to men. However as one can see by this article, many women are fed up with being oppressed and are rising up together to gain the rights that they deserve. This struggle is something that many western women should be able to relate to. Not too long ago American women did not have the right to vote and were therefore not deemed full citizens of the United States. It wasn't until 1920 that the 19th amendment was ratified, giving women the right to vote inthe U.S. This should show everyone that no matter how different someone may be, there is always something there that is shared, whether it be a quality or a struggle or a dream. When women from the tribal areas of Pakistan were asked what they want in life they replied that they didn't want their babies to die and that they wanted their children to recieve an education. This statment is something all women should be able to relate to. I believe that this article should remind everyone that no one can truly be free, until everyone is free and that in the end people are much more similar than they think.

To the Editor,
There was an article published in the Times on Wednesday February 3rd called Iran Sends Some Animals, and Some Ambitions into Space. The main thing that I noticed with this article was that not once did the author explain exactly what Iran claimed their spaceship was for. The only thing that the article did was imply that this spacecraft, and others that Iran has been manufacturing, are nuclear weapons in disguise. In fact Iran’s space craft was barely mentioned except to imply that the video footage that had been released was just a cover. The rest of the article was about how the U.S. keeps telling Iran to stop manufacturing nuclear weapons. I am not saying that this spacecraft was or was not a nuclear weapon, however I think that it is wrong for the author to imply that this spacecraft is any more than a space craft without presenting more facts on the subject.

Afghan Tribe, Vowing to Fight Taliban, to Get U.S. Aid in Return

To the Editor
On January 27th an article was published in the New York Times titled Afghan Tribe, Vowing to Fight Taliban, to Get U.S. Aid in Return. After the many articles about death and destruction in the Middle East this article was a breath of fresh air. This article was about cooperation between a Pashtun tribe and the United States. This type of cooperation is truly going to be a key component in this war. I also feel like many people forget about the other people involved in this war. Many times all that is shown is the U.S. and the Taliban, we forget that there are other people who want peace just as much as we do. Many of these tribes are fighting for their families just like our soldiers are and I think that everyone needs to remember that. I’m really glad that this article was published to remind all of us about the people and their families who are in the middle of this battle just like we are.