English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

post bush will we see a swift exit strategy , will the new admin have a mandate to get out fast

2006-07-11 10:25:51 · 22 answers · asked by pat o 2 in Politics & Government Politics

as the UK sends more troops to afghanistan we need to be safe in the knowledge that uncle sam wont do a vietnam on us

2006-07-11 10:46:37 · update #1

22 answers

No, they will stay in Iraq until the new young generation of troops are as screwed up as the Vietnam generation was at the end of the Vietnam War.

After all, the Iraq War, like the Vietnam War is a terrible war, but it is the only war we have.

How many young American troops are kissed by a bomb in Iraq daily?

Thanks for question.

2006-07-11 10:38:34 · answer #1 · answered by zclifton2 6 · 1 2

I don't think so, but I think a point of any new campaign will be a solid exit strategy, that will not be swift though. I only say this, because the new president, democratic or republican, is not going to want to tick off any US allies, or his colleagues in congress, republican or democratic.

Any exit strategy, has to have a planned, defined timeline.

For example, troops will always need medical care. If a plan is put in place where too many caregivers are pulled out too early, then the welfare of troops could be jeopordized. Same thing goes with supplies and equipment. Everything has to be carefully calculated.

2006-07-11 10:29:39 · answer #2 · answered by Fun and Games 4 · 0 0

possibly this is because Iran isn't a sturdy u . s . a .. you've not any room to talk, the militia is acquainted with extra constructive than you AND the politicians who keep away from it. great, we ought to continuously enable Iran do what it needs excellent? after all, attacking an volatile u . s . a . who needs all others thoroughly lengthy gone is propose. the rationalization Iraq is a multitude is because the POLITICIANS won't be able to salary warfare, they haven't any idea of what warfare quite is. responsible the militia is ludicrous and outright idiotic. Iran became already a close-by skill, the warfare in Iraq did no longer something to assist or keep away from that. just about all of our resources? you quite do not recognize a lot about the U. S. militia do you? Realistically, we are able to arise with the money for a warfare and are more desirable than able to destroying Iran in some weeks time if in basic terms the politicians ought to get their heads out of their butts and hear individuals that recognize. Russia and China's militia powers are pathetic, they could't help a actual warfare off of their turf. Israel is the guy who should be attacking Iran. we are the superpower with the first cost militia. We actually own the skies with an Air stress this is better to the international blended, we dominate the seas with a military that has a tonnage of more desirable than the total international's navies blended, and our floor forces are extra constructive educated and geared up with extra constructive technologies than the different u . s . a .. we are no longer a similar u . s . a . because of the politicians. Our militia is in simple terms as solid because it became formerly. Our political leaders are idiots who recognize no longer something. no longer something. I just about imagine it will be a call for to were in the militia to be a pacesetter of it.

2016-10-14 09:06:09 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Nope, the new admin will drag this war out to keep the attention of the American people away from what they are really doing. Setting us up for a police state with open boarders. Just do a little experiment watch the nightly news and you will notice that more and more that you are being subconsciously being programmed to accept Martial law to be enforced. That is the use of Military for the policing the citizens of the US. Just count how many times you see a police officer or for that matter a solider holding a fully automatic weapon when controlling/guarding a crime scene.

2006-07-11 10:50:39 · answer #4 · answered by mbrenth36 2 · 0 0

This administration will have to start evacuating soon, if he does not the next administration might have no one to evacuate. Civil War is Nasty when both sides turn on the USA. they better wise up. cut run that is a Lie Our troops have fought and died and been wounded , there is a time to call every one home, They did their duty and never did " Cut and Run " this is a Republican Propaganda phrase and there are Democrat and Republican Troops. Get real.

2006-07-11 10:31:30 · answer #5 · answered by kritikos43 5 · 0 0

Only if someone like Gore or Kerry is elected. They are so blinded by their hatred of President Bush they can't see what a mistake it would be to turn our back on the Iraqi people now. They think people are dieing now wait until the insurgents have free run of the country and the Iraqi people aren't ready to deal with it.

2006-07-11 10:31:20 · answer #6 · answered by Ethan M 5 · 0 0

We will not CUT and RUN, we should withdraw as we had no business being there in the first place.

However if the 10 massive permanent bases Kellog Brown and Root set up are any indication the US has NO plans for pulling out of the middle east for decades to come.

2006-07-11 10:29:14 · answer #7 · answered by sscam2001 3 · 0 0

Depends on who comes in. If they just cut and run I think it will be the biggest mistake ever because then the world will come after us for all the damage caused by us leaving before finishing the job there, and suddenly Yahoo Answers will go from Anti-Bush to Anti-New guy and say it is all his fault that it is so bad.

2006-07-11 10:28:22 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

of course, bush is the only ************ who thinks is doing the right thing, he's the worst president the states has ever had. no one would make the same mistakes again, with some much enemies the bush administration has gained who wants more

2006-07-11 10:38:39 · answer #9 · answered by Zamurai_X 2 · 0 0

Possibly.

Then terrorism will return to these shores.

It will be blamed on Bush but the real reason will be because we stopped putting pressure on them.

2006-07-11 10:29:48 · answer #10 · answered by DannyK 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers