Who's in favor of accepting failure, and pulling our troops out of the middle east?

Answer 1

fergetaboutit! were staying till we turn the whole middle east in to east america and from there we'll take over asia then europe, we'll skip africa or maybe use it as a landfill for the world's garbage dump site, south america can be the farm land, and we can use austrailia for the worlds jail. actuall when i put it that way it doesn't sound like such a bad idea anymore.

Answer 2

Failure is a moving target, and, as such, can not be accepted by any but the most discerning hunter. We have Iran surrounded. Syria will not feel too comfortable about messing with the Israel/Lebanon issue. With respect to "failure," I'm not sure exactly where that leaves us. I guess whomever is deemed to be the fomenter of terror will be getting the shakedown. Our troops are in the Middle East strategically (what's next) as much as they are tactically (what's now), so I don't regard a massive withdrawal as our next move in this hugely unstable region. We can presently move on ANY belligerent nation in that region within 24 hours. While we tend to assume a lot of crazy people are in control, they do understand that much. So, you have to understand we will have armed forces in the Middle East for far longer than it will take to have occupational forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, and we already have. By "belligerernt nation," I include Israel, but since they are clearly a US ally, we would not move against them.

Answer 3

Accepting failure?

We failed the moment we attacked Iraq. This was never about terrorism or 9/11 so we were doomed from the start, unless you want to believe each and every excuse, which changed as often as Bush did his underwear, that has been made by Bush, except the one about oil!

Like Bush says, about his war on terrorism, which he obviously doesn't know how to fight:

"So I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him... We haven't heard much from him. And I wouldn't necessarily say he's at the center of any command structure. And, again, I don't know where he is. I- I'll repeat what I said. I truly am not that concerned about him."
—Bush, answering a question about Osama bin Laden at a March 13, 2002 news conference.

To stay because Bush wants the Democrat's to get blamed for his failure, does not justify the death of one more person in the military!

And to stay isn't going to effect the outcome of a regime change. Knocking Saddam off just unstabilized the region and Iran wants to be Big Cheese now except there is no Iraq to stop them!!

Answer 4

I am not in favor of accepting failure at anything. Why should we, we have a vested interest in ensuring that a form of democracy is established in Iraq.

As far as Sheen is concerned it is my opinion that since her son decided to join the military as a volunteer she is disrespecting his name, the brave things he did for his country.
He decided on his own to fight for his country.

She has the right to voice her opinion, only I wish she would not mention her son, who is a hero in our country.

America should never accept defeat.

To be very frank about our war with Iraq and the other wars we have had in the past is that we can see close up daily happenings on the war front. We did not have this instant messages and pictures in WWI and WWII. That is why we have so much decent is because of instant communication.

I hope this has been of some use to you, good luck.

"FIGHT ON"

Answer 5

Nice way of posing the question, as if we decide to save our troops lives' from fighting for more money for bush, it is concidered a failure. Here is an idea, YOU GO OVER THERE AND FIGHT. As far as the person who brought up Sheehan, she is allowed to say something ALONG WITH ANYBODY ELSE THAT LOST A FAMILY MEMBER IN THIS CRISIS.

To the troops that went over there, I applaud you. You fought a war that bush forced you into & should receive a hero's welcome.

Answer 6

Not me. If we pull out now, it will be much worse than it was before we went in. It will create a vacuum in the political aspect. We have to stay now..If it makes you feel better, look up all the death toll from other wars. While I mourn for all the families who have lost loved ones, this is the least expensive in human casualties for our side in what seems like forever. If you were enslaved in a regime who tortured you because of your views, wouldn't you like to have the U.S. to come to the rescue? We are a proud and loving people. What other nation would risk lives to free people they didn't know. None that I can name.

Answer 7

Faliur? Worded like a true neocon( baby killer).we've already lost. We'll never leave the mideast. Not as long as there are babies for the military to kill and money to be made.The neocons love killing babies. They see the news coverage and smile. Ever notice also how the neocons always talk about using nukes? Idiots. We launch them, they launch them then everyone launches them and there is nothing left for the baby killers to conquer.

Its so funny to listen to the baby killers act tough when talking about Iraq. LOL Were like the father that beats his kid. Not so tough if we pick a fight with someone our own size. China? Iraq is as unequal of a match militarily for us as you will find yet we still havnt, after all these years been able to defeat them? Yeah we are real tough. Keep bragging... lots to brag about.

Answer 8

It's better to admit failure now than in ten years time as happened with Vietnam.
It will save a lot of American lives and save putting up another monument to failure.

Answer 9

wow, I don't think the guys in Iraq think we're failing. You need to talk to some veterans who have been in Iraq and stop listening to Cindy Sheehan and those idiot actors(s) and politicians who haven't a clue what's going on.

We'll be out soon enough and when things heat up, its going to get really hot - like about 10,000 degrees with some really bright lights!

Answer 10

No need. Present administration will declare "Mission Accomplished any minute now. But will the troops come home?