The first stages have already started. U.S. commanding generals and senior Pentagon officials have already made comments pertaining to this issue. So this is an issue that isn't even up for debate. Kind of like the weapons of mass destruction issue. Nobody could really dispute the fact that sectarian violence has been so severe that a civil war has started. Not even the most conservative of Republicans could dispute that. The only folks that would dispute that right now is the Bush administration and that is for purposes of semantics and saving face. But once the military admits that sectarian violence is rapidly increasing to alarming rates, you have to go with that answer. They truly know. And wouldn't you know it. At the congressional briefing, Rumsfeld tried to dispute their claims. While he was sitting right next to the commanding generals that said it. That was irresponsible on his part.
2006-08-21 10:42:22
·
answer #1
·
answered by cannonball 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
There's certainly already divided factions in Iraq. The problem is that terrorism campaigns and ethnic cleansing can hardly be called a war. It's just not that well organized.
The hate and violence that has been seething under the surface for years has simply been released. This isn't a war, but unbridled hatred and anger. There's a big difference.
2006-08-21 10:37:24
·
answer #2
·
answered by Privratnik 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Basically they are in the middle of a civil war already. Several groups want to run the country. NATO is there to try to keep peace and to see that the government that is set up is fair to all. Unfortunately several of the other religious sects don't want everyone to have the same rights.
2006-08-21 10:37:10
·
answer #3
·
answered by David T 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Soon? civilian casualties mount on a daily basis...it's happening as we speak. When neighbors are sniping each other and forming militias it is a civil war. The U.S. just doesn't want to admit that. You cannot rule a nation from behind walls. A rich boy's folly foisted upon the world.
2006-08-21 10:36:52
·
answer #4
·
answered by skippybuttknuckle 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
What do you mean soon? They are in a civil war.
2006-08-21 10:47:00
·
answer #5
·
answered by MishMash [I am not one of your fans] 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Take your head out of your a**, there is a civil war already!
2006-08-21 11:53:17
·
answer #6
·
answered by macdyver60 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
All poops going to break loose soon I'm afraid. Iraq wont be the only problem. iran is going to do something stupid. Even the other Arab countries are getting nervous!
2006-08-21 10:36:16
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
thinking the abode Republicans can not improve the payroll tax shrink on center-type taxpayers, after countless the Senate Republicans voted confident, they are going to be no longer able to entice up the articles of impeachment on all and sundry. additionally, he did no longer something impeachable. He observed an settlement set by skill of the previous President and regulations that he proposed previously he grew to enhance into President. the only reason he did no longer comply with stay longer became into because of the fact the Iraqi did comply with grant immunity to US provider workers.
2016-10-02 09:16:12
·
answer #8
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
no since the Majority like us being there. its the shi'ite's that dont like us, since they are the vast minority they hate losing power, so they attack us. but for the rest of the 94% of the country, they like us there, so if 6% vs 94% counts as a real civil war then maybe one is likely, but is improbable.
2006-08-21 10:36:39
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
their already having a civil war shiays and sunis , i didnt spell it right but it sounds something like that
2006-08-21 10:36:15
·
answer #10
·
answered by .................. 4
·
0⤊
0⤋