Before I address this: what's going on there is not ethical cleansing.
In the same light, the US did not kill millions of people.
If by "millions" you mean 2,000,000 people or more, then you're saying we killed every two people in twenty-five people. That's a 1:12.5 ratio. That's an average of 15.4 kills per soldier, assuming there are 130,000 soldiers, ALL in combact roles. In truth, there are cooks, engineers, drivers, etc. Even if you claim half of those kills are attributed to plane bombings, then that's still 7.7 kills/soldier, which is ridiculous--especially when it's done "silently," with no one knowing about it (except for you, obviously).
Case in point: what the Janjaweed are (well, "were") doing--behind CLOSED COURTAINS, in a country no one actually pays all that much attention to, has been uncovered. You think no one would notice 2,000,000 dying all of a sudden, in a zone that's constantly in the news? Geeze.
-----------
I would reply to your post bit-by-bit if it wasn't that big of a pain, but since it is, I'll just give you my general view (which I think should mostly respond to what you're saying).
The Iraqi people did not ask the US to invade Iraq and remove Saddam. Whether they wanted the US to commit this or not is debatable, but not in this thread.
With this in mind, the next thing that the US did was invade Iraq--under multiple pretexts, including the removal of Saddam (oil isn't an official reason, so I won't include it). Be it (morally) right or wrong, this has already happened, and is irreversible.
Seeing as how the U.S forces are the liberators/invaders/freestyle rappers on tour, and are there to (supposedly, partially, whatever) remove Hussein from his reign of power, it's more than appropriate for them to change the flag to reflect that the state is no longer under Hussein's leadership. It might be morally wrong, but it's warranted for.
I'm not saying what happened is good or bad--all I'm saying is that this was part of the "deal," so to speak. What happened happened, and this is the next logical step. There's no protesting it--this action *has to take place*. Iraq, by itself, is in no shape to do such things. This is the cold, hard truth. The infastructure was destroyed (by the US). There is no census, and as such, an election can not take place. Including an election on a flag. The occupying forces and the UN are trying to fix this, but this will take time. Once a real government rises, they'll be free to change the flag, or whatever else they wish. This isn't the first time this has happened in history, and it won't be the last (Lukashenko and Belarus come to mind. Once he is outta there, it's pretty obvious the flag will revert itself to white-red-whire.)
To recap (I don't know if I made myself clear): What's done is done. The Iraqis (as a whole) are in no shape to do what they wish, but this is being fixed. Your demand of allowing the Iraqis to pick the flag is impossible, but is being worked on.
@@ Obviously the american flag was made to represent the many states joined together under truth and freadom but that flag is everything opposit to what that country holds dear. So I guess america should change its flag as well! @@
Totally different standard. The old Iraq flag represented Iraq and Saddam's rule. The new one represents Iraq. The US flag represents the US, and has no mark of any president. It's politically neutral, you could say.
