Many of us would argue that the status quo IS the middle. Peace follows victory, and the quickest way to achieve it is to use overwhelming force is such a way that you either eliminate the enemy's ability to continue, or convince the enemy that they need to surrender in order to save themselves.
If we had bombed Fallujah two years ago, the way Dresden was bombed in WW II, I believe our troops would be home today.
2006-08-23 07:04:37
·
answer #1
·
answered by Jay S 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Not as those terms are currently used.
For those who support "stay the course", anything less than that, any troops re-deployment or even a partial withdrawal, is generally considered "cut and run". It's an "all or nothing" mentality.
Of course, that has no bearing on reality. But neither do many of the beliefs and opinions held by the most outspoken at either end of the political spectrum.
2006-08-23 06:39:10
·
answer #2
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I guess whenever you go into a country and tear out its leader you are obligated then to put it back together. When I first heard we were entering Iraq back in 2003 I figured we be there for at least 5 years if not 10 or 15. Democracy is a slow process in practice and development. To stay the course is basically continuing with plans, staying in Iraq. Cut and run is the idea of us either giving a deadline for our removal of troops or just removing them.
I think we need to lower the amount of troops in Iraq and abroad especially since enlistment has been and still is low. However we can't yank everyone out of Iraq, it would be irresponsible of us. We took that country apart we need to put it back together otherwise we'll continue to make more enemies.
2006-08-23 06:42:21
·
answer #3
·
answered by 7sneakers7 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think the middle is exactly where we need to be. We can't just leave...but yet, we also need a plan for leaving. Congress should make their own timetable...but keep it on the down low. We don't need terrorists knowing exactly when we are leaving, although they will find out anyway. Maybe a few thousand troops home every couple of months...or so. But, some have to stay behind until we know for sure Iraq's new government can stand on it's own...otherwise we will be right back to where we started.
2006-08-23 06:36:25
·
answer #4
·
answered by loubean 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Of course there is the ruling party here in this country have a propaganda dept second to none not even the Third Reich! They fabricate terms like "cut and run" and then use it until you are ready to puke! There is actually light at the end of this long dark tunnel george bush has us trapped in, his own party members are starting to stop marching in lock step! Wake up America we need to make our elected officials do something other than can phrases that they use against each other call them, email them, send them letters demanding they represent YOU their constituent and not the lobby groups lining their pockets with money!
2006-08-23 07:00:06
·
answer #5
·
answered by Chuck P 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Stick with your leader or cut and run.
It's up to you to decide. I am quite worried about
staying around here much longer. but don't want to
leave my family. So what will be will be.
Should we support war or deny war?
Then you come to this are we american's by choice?
Or by birth?
Do your loyalties lie with America or what is right?
Is america right?
If not how do we change it?
Read the rise of the Nazi party then look at your own country and see where pride and reliance on a single thought gets you.
2006-08-23 07:32:34
·
answer #6
·
answered by eg_ansel 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Stay the course=Bushspeak for no plan.
Cut and Run=Cut our losses Bush incurred
There's nothing in the middle because Bush stupidly has NO EXIT "Stateregy".
Now you know
2006-08-23 06:37:32
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Yes there is one simple and very successful strategy.
We need to stop supporting oppressing regimes and call them "Pro Western" governments.
We need to be unbiased, honest, and fair when dealing with the biggest problem in the Middle East, the Israeli Palestinian conflict.
Then you will see how we will stop being a target to every person that is completely oppressed, angry, and willing to kill himself while killing those he believes responsible for the horrible life he has been living.
2006-08-23 07:03:00
·
answer #8
·
answered by Z-Man 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
No not really. But this is like a kid that says he can climb that mountain but he really can't. He tries but won't come down to save his life because he said he could do it. In the meantime, our men and women are dying for nothing. Lets send Bush over there to fight this war of HIS.
2006-08-23 06:40:32
·
answer #9
·
answered by Annie 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yeah, I agree with your point completely. I've thought that myself. I'm starting to wonder...there seems to be a new buildup of troops and Marines...they have recalled Marines...Anyway, I think something big is coming. The only acceptable plan in my opinion is victory, then leave.
2006-08-23 06:39:08
·
answer #10
·
answered by sacolunga 5
·
0⤊
0⤋