MILITARY and RETIRED MILITARY only?

Question

Do you think we should just pack up and leave? What about Iraq what would happen to them if we left and let them get to it?


I think that we would have to deal with Iraq in a couple years if we just left. Another point is that rebuilding a country takes a great deal of time. Another point is that World War II, the war with the German and Japanese Nazis, really began with a "whimper" in 1928. It did not begin with Pearl Harbor. It began with the Japanese invasion of China. It was a war for f ourteen years before America joined it. It officially ended in 194 5 - a 17 year war - and was followed by another decade of US occupation in Germany and Japan to get those countries reconstructed and running on their own again ... a 27- year war. . . . . what do you think?

Answer 1

Absolutely not.

We are WINNING. There is a saying "Snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory". Pulling out now would create a disaster now and in the future. Could you imagine what kind of signal we would send to any potential ally?

The US will be behind you and will fight along side you until we take 1,000 casualties or 100 casualties or even 10 casualties. Then you are on your own.

Whatever happened to President John Kennedy saying "We will pay any price, bear any burden to help freedom loving people"?????????

Instead we seem to be living by "We are in it until CNN and the New York Times say we should start pulling out. You will know the time because the New York Times will start publishing the programs and strategy we are using to defeat the enemy."

If we "just left" we would not have to worry about Iraq. The terrorists would be so emboldened that we would, once again be faced with dealing with terrorist attacks on our own soil.

We can never have enough soldiers and cops to guard all of our vital infrastructure. We must defeat the terrorists before they can attempt an attack.

As far an the overblown "Colin Powell" doctrine of an "exit strategy" goes, I believe we should use the same exit strategy we used in WWII. Establishing bases in Germany and Japan ensured that the Soviets and/or Chinese would face the US immediately.

We should do the same in Iraq. It would halt any expansionist aims of Iran and Syria. If you think they do not have them, you are not paying attention to geopolitics.

InIt2WinIt

Answer 2

Any interest they qualify for like everyone else. And maximum persons that retire seek for some thing that suits our preparation and experience and is a lot decrease stress than what we've been by using the final 2 or 3 many years. Me? i'm going to flow suited over to the protection Logistics corporation working as a DOD civilian doing the (only approximately) the suited same element i'm doing now

Answer 3

We really are stuck, we leave we risk more terrorists, we don't leave we risk more time, lives, and money, not to mention oil. I do know this, if Iraq does erupt into civil war, we are really screwed. cause then we would have to take sides, and that means we would have take sides in a religious based war, which would be in direct violation of our constitution, although it also says we will not up throw a country to eliminate a regime without declaring war, but that's another queston. Also, if you look at post war Germany, mainly Berlin, similar attacks an conflicts did occur.

Answer 4

I don't think we should have our troops dying on forriegn soil fighting in the middle of a civil war that doesn't consern us or Osama Bin Laden. He was what started this whole war on Terror, and hes still running around free as a bird, while more and more soldiers are dying in Iraq. Osama was never the intention of this admistration, oil is. Thats why they set up troops who were not allowed to leave their post at the oil fields, to help out thier own fellow soldiers who were being ambushed. The oil feilds were more important than the other military soldiers dying, to this administration. Why do we have to deal with every body, when we have enough problems of our own to deal with. Fix us first and then lead by example and offer to fix other people. Right now if we were attacked back here in the States or our Overseas Military bases, there are not enough troops to properly protect them. What is the deal with that? This administration doesn't care about its soldiers, I know from expierence. What kind of military takes away an entire pay check, when I have a morgage, a baby to feed, and bills to pay, and say oopps, not my problem put in a pay enquirey and will get it fixed next month. Mean while I have to take out another loan to keep the roof over my head, and food for my baby....... and I'm eating boiled rice and water, cuz there is not enough for me to get some groceries for myself. Only to find out it was a mistake, and they will pay us back in incriments, cuz they can't afford to pay us the money they owe us!.......So, Yeah this administration is in this war to fatten their pocketts and their buddies pocketts. I don't think our troops should be dying over there for oil, for another mans greed, esp. when you leave your home and bases open for attack.

Vetran, and Military Spouse

Answer 5

Nope I think we should stay there until the people of Iraq can control there country on there own. Right now they have over there doing everthing from being the law enforcement, medical treatment, and everything else. We are going through the stages of training them on how to do these diffrent jobs and until we are comfortable that they can go back to supporting themselves and not have to worry about insurgents we should stay

Answer 6

We should not have been there in the first place, Every reason Bush gave and continues to give for our presence is a lie!
Bush is not spreading democracy he is creating enemies.
Unlike WWII we are not wanted in the Mideast.
We destroyed and rebuilt Japan, They mock us!

Bush has no clearly stated objectives in the mideast, Absent a goal there is only occupation.
People are dying needlessly in Chad, the Sudan and many other places why aren't we spreading democracy there?
North Korea and Iran have both openly defied any nuclear reduction efforts, Why aren't we invading them?
1/3 of the people who originally supported Bush no longer do.

America, It's time to make a change!

Answer 7

I agree. If we left now, we would only be validating the bad guy's tactics. We would ensure that we would be facing the same enemy, at a different time and place. The only difference is, they would know for a fact that all they have to do is beat us in the media, and we will tuck tail and run - just like we did in Somalia (thank you, Bill Clinton).

Answer 8

Yes leave Iraq.

Answer 9

NO!! We do not want another Vietnam type cut and run strategy because if we do, we will have another 9/11 on our hands much worse than before. We have to get rid
of all Islamo-Fascist PIGS NOW!!!

Answer 10

I personally think we should, I spent a year over there. I don't think Iraq had anything to do with the terror attack, it is being proven that. Yeah Sadaam was crazy but it is not worth so many of our young people dying. To me what would hapen is that Iraq will continue to fight amongst each other they, just fight us because we are there. For real I see why Saadam was crazy because them people are of the hook, but not to justify his behavior.
Peace!