pull out of Iraq (LEFT)
or
stay in Iraq? (RIGHT)
You all crave a real debate on the issues. Let's start with this one. Who's up for it?
2006-08-25 14:23:18 · 8 answers · asked by Brand X 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I think we have to stay and slowly begin the exit process. We helped create the situation they are in and we cannot just cut and run as it will result in complete chaos.
The reason we went to war is now moot and we have to look to the future.
(I'm a registered Democrat)
2006-08-25 14:27:19 · answer #1 · answered by Salem 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It's me again, SPLATT.
We should pull out of Iraq and send 2/3 to the east and 1/3 to the west.
This will cut the source for terrorists in Iraq and funding for the HezBULLies. The HezBULLies will take us up on our offer to defend the US/Mexican border with the Minutemen.
So, to recap. 1. We're out of Iraq.
2. We've reduced the financial resources of terrorists throughout the Middle East.
3. We've increase the number of armed patrols on the US/Mexican border.
Triple Play.
2006-08-25 22:26:47 · answer #2 · answered by SPLATT 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, in reality, we've never given up occupation of a country. We'll never truly leave Iraq. There is no point in debating about it. Don't talk abuot problems, talk about solutions. This country is on an entropic spiral that is exponentially growing smaller and smaller. It's not really a good place to live if you're not rich anymore.
2006-08-25 21:31:56 · answer #3 · answered by rpalm82 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Left, pull out of Iraq, so people can stop dying, and so Bush can stop putting us in dumbass wars for oil and revenge...
2006-08-25 23:15:06 · answer #4 · answered by RATM 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
left
2006-08-25 21:28:44 · answer #5 · answered by Kimberly V 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
PULL OUT AND PULL BUSH OUT TOO!
+ He joined Prime Minister, Tony Blair, in a "secret" pact to go to war; as reported by Britain's former international development secretary.
+ He lied to mislead America into war, claimed by Ritter, a former Marine.
+ He declared we had ironclad proof that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction which posed an immanent threat to the U.S., and therefore "justified" a preemptive war, as reported by Ray Close, former CIA analyst
+ He committed possible war crimes in Iraq, a claim by former U.S. Representative Clare Callan of Nebraska, and now being adjudicated in federal court.
+ He admitted sending terror suspects to countries that practice torture, despite the fact that the U.S. is party to the 1987 convention against torture.
+ He ambiguously sneers at international law one day and invokes it the next, and expects other countries not to do the same.
+ He threatened small nations if they support a resolution to move international debate about U.S. occupation of Iraq from the Security Council to the General Assembly where the U.S. has no vote.
+ He betrayed our boys who enlist expecting the President to uphold his oath of office, and carry out all operations within the Constitution and treaties to which we are bound.
+ He conducted a secret "dirty tricks" campaign against U.S. Security Council delegation in New York in a effort to win votes in favor of war against Iraq.
+ He is creating permanent military bases in Iraq from which to dominate the Middle East.
+ He is shredding the Constitutional guarantees of basic legal rights and sanctuary from government spying.
+ He is negating civilian control of the military (as the Constitution requires) to give more power to the military and the CIA.
+ He is promoting military injustice by pushing trials with no juries, no right to choose counsel, and no public admitted.
And these are small potatoes. You will notice that there is no mention here of Bush's unwillingness or inability to (1) reign in his war-driven staff of neo-conservatives, (2) his unconcern with the enormous (and rising) war debt, (3) his economic "payoffs" to small nations that "cooperate", (4) his blatant disregard for dissenting congressional advice, (5) his "patriotic" shutting down of opposition voices, (6) his determination to "democratize" every nation in the world at the expense of American lives and money, and (7) his careless disregard for Constitutional law and the Bill of Rights.
All this may be true, you say, but after all, Bush is only one man, he probably is not doing all these things personally. Perhaps, but they reflect the actions of his administration, which reflect the agenda of the president. To believe otherwise would be like saying: if a major corporation is scammed into bankruptcy, don't blame the CEO.
Truman was right. The buck stops with the president. And if this president is guilty of only a fraction of the treasonous acts he is accused of he should be impeached, and faster than Clinton was.
2006-08-25 21:27:55 · answer #6 · answered by soulsearcher 5 · 1⤊ 5⤋
We should pull out of Europe.
We should stay in the ME where the terrorists are.
2006-08-25 21:28:47 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
NOT INTRESTED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2006-08-25 21:26:33 · answer #8 · answered by bobby-bob 5 · 0⤊ 3⤋