Hooray for war! If any one ever asked you what the Iraq war is good for, tell 'em this study by the United States Military Academy: it is good for the self esteem of Iraqi teenagers (if they're still alive ...)[Re-reading my intro, I agree that it was a bit snarky. It's never my intention to denigrate the US armed forces - they have my respect, support, and admiration for doing a difficult and dangerous job. Get back home safely soon, guys.]
Here's an interesting study by the US Army on the effect of war on the psyche of Iraqi teens:
For obvious reasons, few social science researchers have ventured into Iraq since the American-led invasion. However, in 2004, a year into the hostilities, the US Army funded a team of Iraqi interviewers, based at the Asharq Centre for Polls and Marketing Research, to go into ten neighbourhoods of Baghdad to survey the concerns and self-esteem of 1000 teenagers.
The results showed that rather than damaging their sense of self, the war appeared to have bolstered the teenagers' self-esteem, especially in those who felt most strongly that their country was under threat. [...]
The researchers said their finding was consistent with Social Identity Theory, which predicts that people will seek to maintain their sense of self when their identity is under threat. It's also consistent with research on mortality salience, showing that people tend to shore up their sense of self when reminded of, or threatened by, risk of death.
Link (Photo: Staff Stg. Sean A. Foley [wikipedia]) - via Mind Hacks
As first poster I just want to get this out of the way for future commentators: Lets keep the politics out of it please.
With this and the way they handled Terri Schiavo I see a victorious November on the horizon!
Considering the self-destruction of societies under totalitarian rule such as the USSR and Albania, it could be argued that living in a war is better than living under a dictatorship.
The conditions of life in Iraq have improved since the overthrow of Saddam, the best efforts of terrorists and Democratic Party supporters notwithstanding.
Any day now they'll be naming that square in Baghdad after George W. Bush!
The study results are accurate. So what if it was funded by the US military? Don't you think that if your country was invaded, your home constantly under threat, your life so frequently on the wire every time you step foot in the street that you would build a strong identity with your homeland and people?
That's what happens when a dictatorship is replaced by a democracy. Your personal choice to believe the misreporting of the left-wing mainstream media doesn't change the reality on the ground.
Since the overthrow of Saddam? You realize that isn't a terribly high bar? I suppose in twenty years, when unemployment has fallen to twenty percent and the real wages of average Iraqis is higher than it has been historically, the war will prove to have been all worth it!
The fact is, that this is certainly not the case.
I actually don't have an anti-US military streak, but rereading my intro, I'll agree with Tony LaRocca that it does have an anti-military tone. That was unintended and I unreservedly apologize.
Correction is posted above.
Are you out of your mind!!!!!?????
It is a fact that even the neo-fascist Bush regime accepts that living conditions in Iraq have deteriorated since the fall of Saddam. From electricity and gas availability, to rampant extremist gamgs, the war in Iraq has been a veritable disaster for everyone involved, ESPECIALLY the Iraqi people.
Most Iraqis say life was better under Saddam.
If democracy is forced on people, it will not work. It has to come from within. The US doesn't care though. We just want "free trade" and "government contracts" for our multinational corporate cabal to milk from every country we invade and the US taxpayers.
I remember a study that said the healthiest drink to consume after a workout was chocolate milk. It was funded by the Dairy Council.
I'm starting to see a pattern here.
As with most things in politics, the war in Iraq isn't a black or white or even shades of gray issue - it's more like the colors of oil swirling in a pool of water. Yes, we never should have started the war in the first place. Yes, even though our government did it with military and economic benefits in mind, the military has tried it's best to protect and rebuild Iraq for it's people. Due to a ridiculous desire to make the world see us as liberators instead of conquerers, the occupation was botched from day one. The problem now is that the terrorists (by that term, I don't mean "the enemy" I mean forces that a) don't wear uniforms b) act with only fear as a goal rather than tactics, and c) deliberately target civilians) target the public utilities, and target civilians who help our soldiers. They're not targeting members of our military, they're targeting the Iraqis who join the police force. Why the world doesn't show 1/10th of the hatred it has for the US on these terrorists (as they're the ones who are murdering people and destroying the country,) I don't know.
So far, there have been many parallels between Iraq and the Vietnam war. If - as so many want us to - the US simply pulls out, then - like after the Vietnam War - everyone who tried to help rebuild their country, everyone who was proud enough to hold up stained fingers after voting in their democracy - will most likely be slaughtered. (Remember all of those who were killed for helping the US after Desert Storm?) So yes, we created the problem, but we are trying - at the cost of our lives and our economy - to solve the problem. I don't understand what other solution there can be.
oh right yeah, so we're doing them a favour?!?
pull the other one...