No. It means that 60% of those polled think the situation in Iraq has changed in the past 5 years, and that the continued expenditure of American lives and resources may not be worth the potential benefits of staying.
Any businessman or competent leader knows that any decision is partially made on a risk versus reward basis. You look at the risks, figure out what something is definitely going to cost and what it could potentially cost. Then you compare that to what you will gain in the short term and what you might gain in the long term. Then you make a decision. And then when you have new information, you reevaluate your earlier decisons.
Bush is the Decider. He's good at making the initial decision. But he's apparently lousy about re-evaluating those decisions in light of five years of additional information.
Ask yourself. What are the costs in American lives and resources for staying in Iraq. What benefits does America directly gain from being there. And how much do the Iraqi's (as whole, counting the entire population) want us there. Do the math.
60% of the American people have done the math and determined that there is no longer sufficient reason for the US to stay. It doesn't say anything about whether we were right or wrong to go in the first place. It just deals with what we should do now.
60% of the American people have determined that there is no longer sufficient reason for the US to stay. And that's based on what they think is best for America and our troops.
Isn't that the way a democracy is supposed to work?
2006-08-10 06:28:11
·
answer #1
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
60% of Americans know that the only way to win a occupation is to go home. Saddam is gone, the war is over, a government is in place, time for the occupation to end just like Germany and Japan after WWII. We have our 100+ acre embassy Bush and corporations want to run the business part of Iraq at the expense of 3000 troops and more Iraqi people, small price when is is not Bush`s expence.
2006-08-10 06:48:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Everyone who is sane does not like war, in general. I'd say the only people who DO like war are people who dont have to go and can make a lot of money from it. Those polls word their questions in such a way that the majority of people answering sound as if they are supporting the orginization that is paying for the poll. or they may take their poll at a place that will skew the results in favor of somebody. For all we know, that poll may have taken place at a war protest rally or a san fransisco gay bar.
2006-08-10 06:35:38
·
answer #3
·
answered by Stand-up Philosopher 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
each and every American is holds the duty for the death cost made from the invasion. however many distinctive communities did make the death tole so super, u . s . of america performed the region of the initiator. under Saddam there substitute into orderly violence and deaths. Now we could pick what's greater perfect, chaotic violence or the orderly violence under Saddam. As a query greater for interest i might prefer to comprehend what us of a are you from. What you are able to comprehend is likewise that this conflict is in contrast to WW2, our us of a isn't at conflict. Our president substitute into questionably elected that's additionally coach of u . s . of america's opposition of the conflict. purely 27% of yank's nonetheless help the conflict. i might ask you to no longer seek advice from American coverage as u . s . of america's view as an entire. we are a rustic divided, some human beings do no longer communicate for all. properly we are able to confirm if u . s . of america has replaced with the 2008 elections. The elections in 2006 could have been a coach u . s . of america's new perspectives.
2016-11-04 07:16:27
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The war is a pointless waste of lives and money. The Iraqi's were better off under Sadam, they even think that they were better off under Sadam. The only thing that could keep the Shi'ites and Sunni's from killing each other is an absolute dictator. Democracy is just to weak to control them.
2006-08-10 06:29:42
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, it means that 60% are weak-willed, spoiled, fatasses that aren't willing to see anything through. They are too spoiled by instant gratification and can't handle the difficult task at hand.
How do you expect a person that is pissed when their hamburger takes 5 minutes to follow through with winning a war?
2006-08-10 06:32:34
·
answer #6
·
answered by obviously_you'renotagolfer 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
First...It's a Cnn poll, let's take it with a grain of salt.
Second......It's a poll......60% of how many people? Who are they? Where are they from? Are they even Americans?
Third.....Let's assume the poll is legit, how many of those people actually want to pull out right now? How many are dissatisfied simply with the hands behind our back way the war is being prosecuted.
Last.....If you want to pull out now, then yes, you are actively hoping for US defeat.
2006-08-10 06:33:13
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yes, this is what Stephen Colbert and maybe Bill O'Reilly would say. The first would say this jokingly, the second as a condition of keeping his job.
2006-08-10 06:30:20
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No it means 60% are feed up with hearing Islamofascist cry about dead babies.
Muslims kill their own children just for Al Jazier. That creeps me out.
2006-08-10 06:29:59
·
answer #9
·
answered by 43 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
david, WHO CARES! WE NEED TO STAY THE COURSE! ridiculous...hey, I asked a question today, and everyone thought I was British...sure beats being called anti-american! LMAO
2006-08-10 06:32:10
·
answer #10
·
answered by hichefheidi 6
·
0⤊
1⤋