BAGHDAD, Iraq - While American politicians and generals in Washington debate the possibility of civil war in Iraq, U.S. officers and enlisted men who patrol Baghdad daily say it has already begun.
Army troops in and around Baghdad interviewed in the last week cite a long list of evidence that the center of the nation is coming undone: Villages have been abandoned by Sunni and Shiite Muslims; Sunni insurgents have killed thousands of Shiites in car bombings and assassinations; Shiite militia death squads have tortured and killed hundreds, if not thousands, of Sunnis; and when night falls, neighborhoods become open battlegrounds.
******* This whole idea about Democracy in the Middle East is absurd !!!********
There is no possible way to mend the damage that has been done. The only choice is to pull out our troops. We as a Nation must unite and stand our ground ! Force Bush to return our Troops or relinguish his rights as President ! This has gone way to far !!!
2006-08-05 00:21:28 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Current Events
You are right. Democracy inthe Middle East is absurd. The major religious and political force in the Middle East is Islam and the principles of Islam obviate democracy.
It is irrelevant to judge who is right, and who is wrong. No one wins in a war. Property can be restored, but even a lifetime is not long enough to resolve grief over a lost loved one.
Since Muslims, Jews and Christians believe in the messiah, maybe praying for the messiah to come and bring lasting peace before the world destroys itself would be a win-win-win solution
2006-08-05 02:34:11 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
yet somebody else who basically listens to a million/2 of the story and makes up something. McCain does not desire to maintain the Iraq warfare going for a hundred years. He on no account suggested that. He on no account implied that. it quite is in simple terms made up. He did say that there might desire to be troops in Iraq for a hundred years yet he has on no account even recommended that. He in simple terms pronounced the prospect as quickly as. i admire how human beings attempt to tie Bush and McCain to grease companies yet continuously forget that Al Gore's fortune all got here from oil. Neither Bush nor McCain desire the warfare to final a hundred years. they have the two referred to as for the troops to be bumped off as quickly as achieveable yet Bush did not desire to set a schedule without the Iraqi enter. Now that the Iraqi's are waiting to take over, the Bush administration has been discussing the timetable with them. the U. S. public voted out the "Rubberstamp Republicans" in 2006 and very have been given a gaggle of Democrats that have continued to fund the warfare they have been supposedly against without question. an excellent style of stable it did.
2016-12-11 07:10:28 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The question should be why did he send people in the first place?...It would be extremely wrong to just pull everyone out now and leave the Iraqi people to what is left of their country. Saddam Hussein was undeniably a crazy SOB who was the mastermind of such evils done to his people but now all the other crazy bastards that were kept subdued by SH's reign of terror are let loose. What Bush has unknowingly done needs to be fixed before the Iraqi's are left to tread water. Although I believe it probably will not end like that.
2006-08-05 02:40:30 · answer #3 · answered by littleone101 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Mr. Bush has stated on several occasions he does not look at or pay any attention to polls.
It would be nice if this president and shoot from the mouth would see what is going in regards to the war. We have been down this road for too long. Mr. Bush wake up and listen to the American public.
2006-08-05 06:05:14 · answer #4 · answered by murraystate69 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bush sees the American public as primarily redneck cannon-fodder. He won't let them get in the way of his corporate agenda.
Thing is that what you've just described is proof itself that Iraq was actually BETTER off under Saddam. Before the invasion he was pretty well hobbled and fairly helpless. We invaded on the pretext of him developing and possessing an arsenal of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons. The French and Germans and the UN inspectors tried to tell us this was a blatant lie but George poo-pooed them as idiots. We've been had!!!
2006-08-05 00:36:12 · answer #5 · answered by cosmick 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He will not listen because:
1. The same american people voted for his second term in office to the shock of all right thinking people around the world.
2. He entered the war basically to safisfy his ego - I am finishing off what my father could not. His ego is still not satisfied.
3. He will be conclusively proved to be wrong for going to war in the first place.
2006-08-05 01:08:18 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If we pull out of Iraq now we'll be making the same mistake the President's father made. And the same mistake we made in Viet Nam. We must stay the course and finish what we started. It's important to continue in our efforts to stabilize and rebuild Iraq.
2006-08-05 02:47:27 · answer #7 · answered by celticwoman777 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is the same question asked in every war.
2006-08-07 15:40:12 · answer #8 · answered by j615 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I answered this in part last night. See site:
2006-08-05 01:22:54 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋