Iraq

Prior to the Iraq War, no. Saddam Hussein was an ardent Nationalist Secularist and opposed the Internationalist Islamist agenda of Al-Qaeda. Both are notably violent philosophies and both are in the Islamic World, but that is where the similarity ends. Both people/organizations had a fundamentally different view of the world and therefore were not aligned.

When the Iraq War started, the Iraqi Republican Guard and the remainder of the armed forces were drawn away from the border to deal with the US-led invasion force. This allowed al-Qaeda militants to more easily penetrate the borders of the country. From 2003-2006, remnants of the former Iraqi military (after the US-led Coalition conquered Baghdad) and al-Qaeda militants began to form an uneasy alliance against the foreigners. This alliance broke down as more and more former Iraqi soldiers were able to integrate into the new Iraqi Government or get jobs outside of the military.

By 2007, domestic Iraqi al-Qaeda cells had formed in most Sunni-dominated Iraqi provinces (since al-Qaeda is a Sunni-leaning organization). The new Iraqi Government aligned itself with the US coalition, the Kurdish Peshmerga military, and the local Sunni Sheikh Awakening Councils in a push to eliminate al-Qaeda in Iraq. Success was made on this front, especially in light of the US "Surge" and by 2010, Iraq was relatively safe from al-Qaeda. However, the US withdrawal in 2011 and the increasing factionalism between the Shiite-led Iraqi Government and Sunni-led Awakening Councils has led to al-Qaeda becoming more prevalent in Iraq.

a multinational force composed largely of United States and United Kingdom troops supported by smaller contingents from Australia, Denmark, Poland and other nations. All of the Arab states and a number of members of the NATO alliance did not publicly support the invasion, while Eastern European states were willing to offer their public support !:

The administration wanted to remove Saddam from power; which was done. Now the administration has to restore law and order and stability to that nation.

The primary individual weapons of the Army are the M16 series assault rifle and its compact variant, the M4 carbine, which is slowly replacing selected M16 series rifles in some units and is primarily used by infantry, Ranger, and Special Operations forces. Optionally the M9 bayonet can be attached to either variant for close-quarters fighting. The 40 mm M203 grenade launcher can also be attached for additional firepower. Soldiers whose duties require a more compact weapon, such as combat vehicle crew members, staff officers, and military police, are issued a sidearm in lieu of (or in addition to) a rifle. The most common sidearm in the U.S. Army is the 9 mm M9 pistol which is issued to the majority of combat and support units. Other, less commonly issued sidearms include the M11, used by Special Agents of the CID, and the MK23, used by some Army Special Forces units.

In addition to these basic rifles and sidearms, many combat units' arsenals are supplemented with a variety of specialized weapons, including the M249 Squad Automatic Weapon (SAW) light machine-gun, to provide suppressive fire at the fire-team level, the M1014 Joint Service Combat Shotgun or the Mossberg 590 Shotgun for door breaching and close-quarters combat, the M14 Rifle for long-range marksmen, and the M107 Long Range Sniper Rifle, the M24 Sniper Weapon System, or the M110 Semi-Automatic Sniper Rifle for snipers. Hand grenades, such as the M67 fragmentation grenade and M18 smoke grenade, are also used by combat troops.

The Army employs various crew-served weapons (so named because they are operated by two or more soldiers in order to transport items such as spare barrels, tripods, base plates, and extra ammunition) to provide heavy firepower at ranges exceeding that of individual weapons. The M240 is the Army's standard medium general-purpose machine gun. The M240 (left-hand feed) and M240C (right-hand feed) variants are used as coaxial machine guns on the M1 Abrams tank and the M2 Bradley IFV, respectively; the M240B is the infantry variant and can be fired from a bipod or tripod if carried by hand, or employed from a pintle mount atop a vehicle. The M2 .50-caliber heavy machine gun has been in use since 1932 in a variety of roles, from infantry support to air defense. The M2 is also the primary weapon on most Stryker ACV variants and the secondary weapon system on the M1 Abrams tank. The MK 19 40 mm grenade machine gun is mainly used by motorized units, such as Stryker Brigades, HMMWV-mounted cavalry scouts, and Military Police. It is commonly employed in a complementary role to the M2.

Loss of troops, prevention of Iran Russia nuclear relations. Democracy in Iraqi Government. Radical Islam will simmer down, And most of all elimination of Al Qaeda terrorsts and prevention of another terrorist attack like 9/11.

This site --->

http://members.aol.com/amerwar/ff/ff.htm

lists American ff casualties at 18%

If 406,000 Americans were killed, that places the friendly fire death toll at roughly 78,000.

And sixty years later the problem still happens with a lack of proper fire control by US troops.

Example the 4 dead and 8 wounded Canadian soldiers who were bombed by the USAF in 2001, in Afghanistan. Two F16 pilots attacked the Canadians as they were conducting a live fire range exercise. The pilots claimed that they were "under fire" from the ground. The aircraft were flying at 20,000 feet, and the ground fire was at ground targets, with small arms weapons, not anti-aircraft missiles. No infantry weapon can reach 20,000 feet of altitude.

The AWACS controller told the F16's to "hold your fire" but they didn't listen, and four young Canadians died as a result.

Just one modern example of how dangerous it is to be near U.S. army troops when you are a "friendly force".

Hey Joey look I can edit this so that its factual information

There was a saying in WW2

When the Germans shoot, The British duck

When the British shoot, the Germans duck

When the Americans shoot, everybody ducks.

At the time, Iran was a bigger threat to the US, and giving Iran another strong enemy to worry about would help US in it's machinations against Iran.

There was something about 'Weapons of Mass Destruction' & we all had 45 minutes to live ! Oh dear: it appears we were misinformed. In retrospect it appears a poor way to effect 'Regime change'. An insecure base on which to go to war. This does not mean I think, thought rather, that Saddam Hussein was a good man. It does mean I think the people of Iraq deserve better.

The United States has leveled numerous accusations at Saddam Hussein, so just choosing one is rather odd. However, if you are looking for the accusation which was supposed to justify the Iraq War of 2003-2011, this was the accusation that Saddam had stockpiles of "weapons of mass destruction", generally chemical and biological weapons.

Military sealift command

No he is not. Saddam Hussien was killed in 2006, but there have been sightings of bin Laden since then.

At the time, just after September 11, 2001, it certainly was. The US had to strike somewhere...the American public demanded it. That attack was fairly emotional for US citizens; especially citizens living back east (read New York).

At the time, US Intel ID'd Afghanistan as a probable AO (Area of Operation). It was a good guess; but US Special Operations (etc. etc. etc.) that are (or were) built to deal with those problems were not as experienced as they used to be during the cold war era. Relying too much on "whiz bang bells and whistles" hi-tech toys, and new politically motivated (and politically correct) military leaders who just wanted "JOB SECURITY" and not get the job done (kill the enemy and go home) has resulted in nothing...but being in Afghanistan (job security).

Bottom line; what started out as a noble cause, has turned into "just a steady pay-check" for the participants.

over 20,000 troops

When Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, the resulting conflict was known as the Gulf War. The initial coalition military operation was called "Operation Desert Shield" and had the job of protecting Saudi Arabia from attack. The offensive, called "Operation Desert Storm", began on Jan 15, 1991 when the coalition forces launched their attack on Iraq.

The US-led war against Iraq did not begin in March 2003, as many Americans believe. In fact the US and Britain had been waging an undeclared war against Iraq for twelve years, ever since the end of the Gulf Slaughter in 1991 (see John Pilger's The Secret War on Iraq). The...........

NO NATION is at war with Iraq. Iraq is the restoration of law, order and stability to Iraq.

AMERICA WAS at war with North Vietnam.

Actually buddy I am a Marine and i fought in Iraq and Afghanistan. We are still keeping peace in Iraq. Afghanistan is our main priority right now. Vietnam or NVA or gooks that war was nothing like the war were in now. Vietnam didn't have the greatest technology and we (us) speaking didnt have good tech either. That's why so many men died in Vietnam. Afghanistan we worry about ambushes, ied's and rpgs and heavy machine guns. we have only lost 5000 men in this war and 58000 men died in Vietnam. Thanks but don't comment on something you have no clue about.

It's said the the wars going on in the middle east are like Vietnam, both a bit of a lost cause. Vietnam was the first televised war and was a first for helicopters, I think. Both wars a bit of a power struggle to. Consider how much money would be introduced in to th e USA econmy if they win in the middle east. Vietnam was a fight against Comunism and to intervene with the domino effect. They are a like in some ways many things could annd can be aqquried with a win. I'm just glas the the SAS are pulling out next year. ITS STUPID

No. Although Iraq began a war with Iran while the Hostage Crisis was ongoing, it was seen by the US government as a war between two brutal dictatorships; both of them unfriendly to the United States, and a war in which the United States wanted neither side to win. Sadaam Hussein in Iraq was never seen as a US ally, any more than the Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran was seen as a US ally.

Ancient Baghdad was a huge area of trade. Spices, clothing, porcelain, and other exotic goods went through the city

As of December 16, 2011, the United States has withdrawn all combat troops from Iraq, ending the international conflict. However, the Iraqi insurgency has only grown and become more violent in the absence of American soldiers. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki has considered requesting the Americans to return to help him restore peace to the country.

Death and Destruction. Not to forget the oil!

Saddam Hussein was the dictator from 1979 until 2003

The US is trying to restore law, order, and stability to the country. It is a "Police Action."

Babylon, Iraq