Iraq?

I feel like it's a money vs lives thing.
We can either spend the money to stop the Islamic State from slaughtering any Shias, or anyone else that stands in their way, or we can let people die in order to not spend more money on a military budget that has had to be reduced in the past few years.

But it also seems like if we do help Iraq, the moment we leave a similar group would just do it again.

Anyways, what are your guys' thoughts/opinions on this matter and what would be a suitable response?


Please let's not make this a bashing thread where we get caught up in political mumbo jumbo. I'm just asking this as kind of an ethical question as to how can you argue for sending troops or for not sending troops. Is the temporary benefit worth it for Iraq if the U.S. has to dig further into its pockets to pay for it? Or are we better off letting the descendants of the Muslim Brotherhood take back their Islamic world (which would also mean millions of deaths for Muslims who would resist)?

 

The united states needs to stay out of it. Fuck em'.

We can't go around being the worlds mediators anymore, we have got too much shit on our own plate. Let them work it out amongst themselves. Just my .02, I KNOW its callous but its true just the same.

 

Why does the United States have to get involved to begin with?

Edit* (I'm assuming you mean the United States needs to get involved since you're also from California)

 

When USA first entered Iraq, we all saw what happened. It take years to stabilize i assume.
But with brute force we saw that it only takes couple years. Then it brings back chaos. Just like now.
The fire is burning, and it will not stop so easily. USA, muslims etc. There are nothing to do. Ah reason muslims can't do something is, they are 2 sided couse of an idiot thing that has happened 1000-1500 years ago.

Edit: Corrected grammer, if i have mistakes please state.
Thanks