Get out of the Iraqi war or stay til its over? Prefer only liberals answer.?

Question

Before anyone jumps and says... oh another bleeding heart, anti-american liberal (LOL), let me say 1st that I participated in Gulf War 1 & I am a proud LIBERAL. I really don't care what ppl call me but I state that in order to make it clear that this is a serious question.

With that said, I opposed the war from day 1. With Gulf War 1, one of our allies had been occupied and we should and did help them. I never felt and still don't believe we had any business occupying Iraq.

But, now that we have created complete havoc over there, what do we do? My first impulse is to say... stay and try to fix it the best we can because we are the ones who made the mess. Then I think of how many ppl are dieing.

So, what if it doesn't get any better with more and more Americans dieing? I mean seriously, do we bail or stay? We now know the reasons we went there were false but now we have made a mess.

I just don't know.... I don't want more Americans dieing but I also don't want to surrender.

Anyone know of any alternatives that I am not aware of? Like has any other countries that are our allies offerred to step in and take over rebuilding Iraq?

Answer 1

I have a confession I'm a Liberal. When people I know ask me I tell they that I'm a Democrat that is so far on the left wing that I fell off. It's not that I'm imbarrised I just hate getting into it everytime someone ask me my party. (LOL) This is also a question that I ask myself everyday. I don't want anymore lives lost over this war regardless of the country the person comes from. I know that no time soon we will be leaving. Bush has to much pride for that. He will not back down from this war. Hell, he can't adimit that he was wrong for prosueing Iraq. I was against this from the begining. I don't understand how our goverment and also fellow American got so side track from what we knew went on during 9/11. I think we should have started with facts first then worry about solving all the detail to 9/11. The facts were... we knew Osama Bin Laden was responsible for 9/11. If we are going to war with him how did we end up in Iraq? We had no proof that Saddam Hussin had any thing to do with 9/11 and also we had no proof that Bin Laden was in Iraq. Why are we there? We still have a long time before we elect another president. If the Americans can take the time to think for their selves they will vote for a Democratic president. If we get one I strongly fill they will bring home the troops. They probalaly will not bring them home at one time but within 2 yrs. I think the Iraq war the first time was left unresolved by leaving Hussin president. I don't think we should go to other countries and over throw their president but we wouldn't have a reason to be there this time. This time to me is also stupid. It is like another Vietinam. We are accomplishing nothing. I know they have been improvments their but look at all the lives that have been lost. Most of the people in Iraq don't want us there. They might want our help but they don't want a war in their country. Their families are dying and at want cost to them. So they can go vote for a president (that we had to approve of) and know have a constuntion ( that we have to approve of). They are told about all these desissions they are being allowed to make but they are chose from what we are allowing them to chose from. They are not having a democracy they have a dictatership but instead on Hussin they have Bush.

Answer 2

How can we ever be sure when to say "It's over?" The Pentagon stated a typical modern insurgency lasts about 8 years, thus we will be there 4 more years. Meanwhile, this war is costing the American people several times the amount the war planners said it would. They thought around 80 billion would cover it, but its going to cost, by some estimates, closer to a trillion, including medical treatment and compensation for the wounded and families of the dead. Not to mention the fact that the Army released a study saying that about 17% of our troops are beginning to show signs of significant psychological damage and post-tramatic stress disorder. Some of them will never be the same.
China and Russia have joined in recent military exercises, but because we have so much of our resources tied down in the middle east, we are not on a strategic footing to engage in another theater of operations.
As far as how the Iraqis feel, a recent poll stated that nearly 70 percent of that countries citizens want us to leave, while in this country nearly the same amount believe going to war in Iraq was a mistake. Whoever decides, in a democracy, to oppose the will of the people gets booted out of power, so it doesn't look like Bush will have much to say about it for very long, unless he wants to get impeached.

Answer 3

To Give you my opinion , and to go straight to my point.. I just want you to answer these two questions... How many people died in Iraq allover Saddam`s presidential period? and how many people died since the American occupation? .. I believe that you will find very closed numbers .. but you have to consider the two intervals we are talking about..
Thus , you have to face the fact , that you just took Saddam`s place ... don`t even start thinking and repeating the terrorism war bull shetts!!!! The first and main reason of the war that the U.S. government announced was . to disarm Iraq from the massive destruction weapons ...( Can you tell me where are these?) .. But every single idiot in the world knows that it was for O I L .. and nothing else .......
If it were only for searching Nu-cs or prevailing peace !!! then I am not going to be a Nobel prize winner to remind your good government , that there are more than million ways to get these things fixed and well done , without blood letting their young men and ladies , also gaining hate of every free individual in the world moreover the Iraqi civil war that was caused by this non-studied step ...! You should pull out 5 years ago ..

Answer 4

There's a huge question here, and that is to define "until it's over."

Until we win the war on terrorism? How is that defined? Will that ever be "won?"

And how can us leaving be defined as "surrender?"

I agree, we've made a complete mess there, and the country is unstable. The Iraqis need to be able to handle things themselves, but they're getting pretty co-dependent with us. Why should their troops risk their lives to quash the insurgency when the US is there doing it?

We need to set a firm deadline, very soon, for exiting the quagmire, and then do it. The Iraqis, hopefully, would realize we're serious and step up their training of their troops and start taking their government responsibilities seriously.

Answer 5

Well, I don't claim to be Liberal. I own firearms and support the death penalty and a balanced budget, for instance. However, my "conservative" acquaintences call me one, so I will reply.

At the outset, I would like to have someone define "when it's over." W claimed victory in a photo op on an aircraft carrier, and still US troops are dying. We captured Saddam, and still US troops are dying. We failed to find the WMD which Saddam said he didn't have, and still US troops are dying. We haven't found Osam in Iraq, and still US troops are dying. We have made people like Zarqawi possible (altho I'm glad they sent his *** to hell) and still US troops are dying.

When the f*** is it going to be over? Which brings up the awkward question: How many Iraqs flew planes into the WTC? Or the other awkward question: If it's common knowledge that Osama is in the hills between Pak. and Afghan, why the hell are we in Iraq?

Nevertheless, Bush, in his infinite wisdom, committed other people's loved ones to die in Afghanistan and Iraq. It would seem reasonable for the nation to demand of him a definition of "when its over." To date, I don't recall hearing any criteria out of his puppet mouth.

If we wait until there is no more violence in Iraq, we could be there for a long time. Of course, that would give US a reason to populate those permanent military bases we are building there right now.

And don't forget, unrest in the middle east causes nervous speculation among futures traders which skyrockets the price of a barrel of crude. $3.00/gal under Bush. Coincidence? I think not.

Answer 6

We have to stay and see it through or the Iraqis who are already on our side (over half) will not appreciate being abandoned. Once you tear down a country you must help build it back up, or it will collapse. We pulled out once before, and look what happened. Once it's stable again, we need to get out.

Answer 7

Get out!! Let them fix their own problems. We have enough of them here. Which especially includes our President. He's making us into sitting ducks. I have two friends being deployed back in 2007 and they have a total different outlook about the war than what we are being told.

Answer 8

"Haven't you had enough of the brute, stupid, childish, and, otherwise, adolescent, exploitative representation of human (or, really, sub-human) existence that is played out daily (in the name, and on the lives, of each and every born human being) by competing governments, politicians, militarists, scientists, technocrats, social planners, educators, exoteric and fundamentalist religionists (who aggressively propagate the provincial, and pharisaical, religions of ego-salvation, rather than practice the universal, and ego-transcending, religion of love), and media hypers (who thrive on the invention and exaggeration of conflict, and dramatically showcase the worst of human instincts in the unending "gotcha" game that denudes and exposes and trivializes and hypocritically mocks the highs, and the inevitable lows, and even the natural ordinariness in the struggling efforts of humankind)? Isn't it evident, in your deepest feeling-psyche, that this Wisdom-renouncing world is being controlled by the worst and most superficial conceptions of existence?

It is now time for every one, and all, to understand themselves, and to reclaim the world from the dictatorship of the ego, and from all of those who play at politics (and life in general) as if it were a sporting event that is supposed to excite and entertain every one on television.

Nuclear disarmament is a relatively positive, but still too superficial and piecemeal, effort. It is not a truly curative means, but only another palliative and temporary move in the midst of mankind's traditional advance toward future trouble. There is something more fundamental than the disarmament politics whereby enemies come to a gentlemanly agreement on how to kill one another without destroying one another! What is more fundamental, necessary, and truly curative is that human beings, individually and collectively, understand and transcend that which is in them that leads them to confront one another as opponents and enemies.

It may sound naive to speak of the necessity for the present (childish, and brutishly adolescent) crowd of governments and institutions to understand themselves and renounce the self-imagery and the techniques of enemies, but the feeling that it is naive to speak in such terms is merely a reflection of egoic frustration and despair. Human beings everywhere must now transcend that very frustration and despair if they are going to prevent the enslavement and destruction of mankind.

Humanity is living in bondage now. Mankind is already, presently, globally, bound to egocentric and materialistic idealisms that are suppressing the human freedom to live by Wisdom and Realize the Truth. If human beings do not shake loose from this regime, they are going to suffer the extreme fulfillment of collective egoic destiny, in a "Narcissistic" holocaust that will either enslave mankind (via a technologically robotized political and social order) or (otherwise) destroy mankind (via technologically engineered warfare).

It is not naive to demand a new leadership when those who are led (and who could make the counter-demand for change) number in the billions. Nor is it folly to try to educate mankind when the only alternative is slavery and death. Therefore, I Say to you: All must commit themselves to understand the patterns by which they are now (and have traditionally been) living (both individually and collectively), so that they can then change those patterns and the destinies those patterns will (otherwise) inevitably inflict upon them."

Answer 9

If we backed out now Iraq qould go back to being a dictatorship...
It's getting better cuz we just got one of the BIG dirtbags out of there....I hope it's ok that i answered...I'm not liberal or conservative...I agree with somethings on both sides and I disagree with somethings on both sides...

Answer 10

i ain't surrendering. i think we should stay there as long as it takes until every terrorist is eliminated. i am willing to go there and die if it comes down to it. i'm a conservative by the way.