In This Section
TV Guide Spotlight
Also on TVGuide.com
|
« Today's News: Our Take
Angelina Jolie: We Should Stay in Iraq
Angelina Jolie by Kevin Mazur/ WireImage.com
In an op-ed article published in Thursday's Washington Post, Angelina Jolie argued that U.S. troops should stay in Iraq to assist in humanitarian efforts.
("Oh, reeeeeally?" you can imagine Sens. Clinton and Obama asking.)
It's an interesting tack from Jolie, who is a goodwill ambassador to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. Her basic point: Though it's popular to want to bring the troops home as soon as possible, Iraq is in such disarray that only a military presence can ensure that we fulfill our humanitarian promises to the region.
Jolie even goes so far as to say that our national security would be compromised by pulling out. "Can the United States afford to gamble that four million or more poor and displaced people, in the heart of the Middle East, won't explode in violent desperation, sending the whole region into further disorder?" she asks.
The actress states that 54 percent of these millions of refugees are under the age of 12. In the article, she also name-checks Army Gen. David Petraeus and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, both of whom she met with on her visit to the Middle East earlier this month.
What do you think? Is Angie on to something? — Mickey O'Connor
|
TVGuide Links:
|
|
|
|
Feb 29, 2008 11:45 AM
|
Neither Democratic candidate has any intentions of immediately "pulling the plug" on the Iraq occupation, despite what they say on the stump. But the front-running Republican candidate wants to spend another 100 years there.
You tell me...
At the current annual cost in blood and $$$$$$$$,
who can afford another 100 years there?
Let Brangelina pay for it!
|
|
Feb 29, 2008 11:56 AM
|
|
I just can't seem to figure out where I stand with Angelina Jolie. On the one hand, I don't like her for things she has done to other people, but then on the other hand... she does seem to do a lot of humanitarian work and I respect her for that. I just don't know how genuine she is. As far as the actual statements made in the article- there is no easy solution to this and there are positive and negatives to each solution. Unfortunately, I wish we never went in the first place. But since we did, we need to at least stablize the situation a little more before we hurry and leave.
|
|
Feb 29, 2008 12:04 PM
|
|
We certainly can't just leave, Angelina is correct. But we never should have been there in the first place. It's a terrible place we've put ourselves in, unfortunately.
|
|
Feb 29, 2008 12:16 PM
|
|
FINALLY! Someone in Hollywood who gets it! Thank you, Angelina for being a voice of reason. We need to stay and help them get on their feet. I disagree that McCain wants to stay there 100 years for the simple fact that I heard that Bush and General Petraus(sp?) have a PLAN for pulling out already, but that didn't make the news.... hm... and the troop surged worked... hm... This isn't a political forum, so I won't go too deep but if we really want to save our economy- let's stop the illegal immigration because that costs us $90 billion a year, which is more than the war!!
|
|
Feb 29, 2008 12:27 PM
|
I agree, ladypictureshow and Dianora.
I like Angelina Jolie more and more each day.
The majority of the American people supported either the decision to go to war or at least the government that made that decision. Now that we are there, we can't just drop out because people didn't have the foresight to note things like power vacuums and factionalism.
There is a humanitarian crisis in Iraq, which we created and as a result, we need to step up and stay there for as long as we need to before we can ensure that the nation can has a centralized military strong enough to protect itself.
|
|
Feb 29, 2008 12:36 PM
|
WOW, I am shocked that I completely agree with a Hollywood actress...Angelina is right! Despite anyone's feelings on if we should or should not have gone to war with Iraq, the simple fact is we did. The country is in need of stability and our troops can lead that mission. It is far more dangerous to leave now and allow Iraq to fall into a civil war that would spread throughout the Middle East.
It is so refreshing to hear someone of Angelina's notoriety be so level headed.
|
|
Feb 29, 2008 12:50 PM
|
|
It is a moot point as to whether or not we should have gone there in the first place. Fact is we are there and we will ALWAYS have a presence there for the remainder of time. Like it or not folks, there will always be an American presence there, no matter who becomes President.
|
|
Feb 29, 2008 12:50 PM
|
I'm one of those nasty people who NEVER wanted us to get involved in the first place and vehemently protested against the war from the moment the idea was first voiced. But, now that we're there, we have to be very careful about how we pull out. Otherwise, we're leaving the innocent to be slaughtered. So, Jolie has a strong point there.
As for "staying as long as we need to" to stabilize the country - oh, please. We are the ones who destabilized it to begin with. And it is wrecking our economy in return, because of the sky-high oil prices that effect transportation of food and goods and imports. You can't blame illegal immigrants solely for our recession (which is what it is, really, when you take the rose-colored glasses off). We are also pouring billions of dollars per day into this war, and the money had to come from someplace - a someplace called us.
Bush is the worst president in the history of the country.
|
|
Feb 29, 2008 12:55 PM
|
|
I'm with you 100% Katcon!
|
|
Feb 29, 2008 1:07 PM
|
Angelina is right and I'm glad to see so many other comments praising/supporting/agreeing with her - I expected a lot more of the usual wiseass comments that articles about her and Brad seem to generate.
The real tragedy about keeping our troops over there to help stabilize the situation is the danger that they are in from kamikaze-type attacks, snipers, car bombs, etc. There has been too much blood shed by these brave men and women, and all that blood is directly on Bush's head. They are not safe in Iraq and will continue to be targets.
|
|
Feb 29, 2008 1:12 PM
|
I love her. I've always been a fan and I look up to her so much. Not many people in her position are willing to do what she does. She has said she only works so she can travel more and give a voice to those who don't have one. I admire her.
She kept a journal on her first trip as a UN goodwill ambassador. It was made into a book. There's some stuff in it I didn't like (stuff about her husband at the time, billy bob EEW) but I read quite a bit of it as it was posted online and it's kinda interesting.
|
|
Feb 29, 2008 1:23 PM
|
Bush is the worst president in the history of the country.
That's a little bit of hyperbole there, and it certainly turns a blind eye to the terrible presidents who made terrible decisions who existed before any of us were ever born.
|
|
Feb 29, 2008 1:35 PM
|
Katcon and those who are so ignorant to agree with you: What is your version of stable? Is it a dictator that murders millions of his countrymen? Is it a dictator that DID have WMD's (he admitted he removed them before we arrived) and would have brought them back to his country once the rest of the world turned their eyes? Is it a country that helps to breed hate for other countries, religion, women....and well just hate in general? Please. We did not destablize Iraq.
As for Jolie, I am shocked by her opinion and ability to see beyond what is popular with her fellow celebrities. That is an impressive statement.
|
|
Feb 29, 2008 1:37 PM
|
she is spot on - I really want to know what Obama's and McCain's plans are to finish out the war. That, to me, is the deciding factor as to who I'll vote for.
**yes, I intentionally omitted Hillary**
|
|
Feb 29, 2008 1:43 PM
|
|
|
