2006-09-11 11:00:57 · 34 answers · asked by cb09 1 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
No. This isn't a war on terror either its about power, who has more of it and who can take it away from the other first. Instead of killing people they should just play tug of war with a rope and mud - winner take all. Peace and goodnight.
2006-09-11 11:04:43 · answer #1 · answered by frecklzface 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't feel President Bush is doing his best to get the troops out of Iraq. Honestly, I don't even believe that President Bush declared war on Iraq to stop war on terror. I believe that President Bush wanted to follow in his dad's footsteps and try to gain control over the oilfields as everybody knows they have a share in the oil stock market.
2006-09-11 11:18:55 · answer #2 · answered by Pumpkin 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Why would anyone want to "stop" the war on terror? I believe the President is doing everything he can to protect the American people. That includes trying to introduce some sanity into the Middle East.
The President is committed to keeping troops in Iraq until the Iraqi government can take over defense of the country.
That day will come in the near future.
The war on terror will not end in our lifetimes.
2006-09-11 11:05:02 · answer #3 · answered by regerugged 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Unquestionably yes. Even as we speak the Iraqis are taking over more and more control of their nation's security functions. As to the greater War on Terror question only naive fools believe it will--or can--be a short-term conflict. But our choice is clear; we can either fight it for however long it takes....or we can cut-and-run (as the Democrats always want America to do) and the terrorists will follow us all the way back here and the war we ran from will recommence full-scale right here on the home front. In Novenmber this makes America's choice crystal clear. Keep the Republicans in power and we'll fight the terrorists overseas. Bring in the Democrats and we'll see the entire Terrorist Operation moved right here to Main St. America.
2006-09-11 11:08:35 · answer #4 · answered by Wayne H 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I honestly believe that is all he thinks about. Seriously, do all of you think that Bush really wants to keep the troops in Iraq any longer than he has to?
2006-09-11 11:50:36 · answer #5 · answered by Walter D 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, he's not trying to at all to get the troops out of Iraq. He could give a rat's azz about them. His goal is to take all of the focus off of the real issue and that should be capturing Bin Laden and the terrorists responsible for 9/11.
2006-09-11 11:33:23 · answer #6 · answered by chocolatebabycakes 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
the two Bush and Reagan have been undesirable presidents. They abused and made a mockery of their place. In a democracy the political chief of a rustic should not be some efficient idol. while Reagan replaced into president, even nonetheless the U.S. knew that Saddam Husein replaced right into a threat to the region and his very own people, the U.S. offered him weapons. look it up. Bush and his cronies offered you the "war" in Iraq, even nonetheless Bin laden is Saudi Arabian, the people who commited the 9/11 assaults have been Saudi Arabian, and that they have got been funded with the help of Saudi Arabians. i've got faith sorry for you people who purely see an American view. if you bought out of your us of a for awhile and paid interest, you may comprehend those issues. a number of you comprehend those issues and are doing some thing approximately it. yet, regrettably lots do no longer. So, Saddam went forward and killed people utilising American weapons! He sprayed chemical compounds from American helicopters! after which while Bush starts the war on a rustic for no stable reason, his cronies sell the belief of war to you with the help of asserting how undesirable Saddam is/replaced into! it rather is not even a "war", so there is not any longer something to lose, different than the lives of harmless people. What precisely could define "triumphing" for you? there is not any longer something to win. Who could you win it from, in spite of this magical element is? that may not one thousand years in the past once you had us of a A battling us of a B and one comes out a "winner". The U.S. protection stress is basically annoying an already stressful subject, killing hundreds of people, which contains people. Even Vietnam replaced into extra sparkling-cut back than this, and Vietnam replaced into an entire waste of human lives. you should circulate to Iraq and spot for your self what's going on, or a minimum of get out of the U.S. for awhile to sparkling your suggestions.
2016-11-07 03:13:08 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hell no! I have a cousin who has been to Iraq twice. There is a big possibility he will have to go back. The longer Bush have troops in Iraq, there will be more body bags. They don't what us there. Fix the USA first. This will be another Vietnam.
2006-09-11 11:07:04 · answer #8 · answered by sweet_sensitivelady 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No. He says that he isn't gonna pull the troops out yet, and if the Iraqi government is gonna take control, we need to get out of there. He is doing all he can on the war on terror, but ultimately, the terrorist organizations are gonna get new leaders and still blow up people and cars and other stuff so there's nothing he can do unless it is getting all of the terrorists.
2006-09-11 11:04:58 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes. No matter what others think, he's doing the best he can as president of our country in light of things. Perhaps the war against terrorism would be over by this year or of next within the next 16 months or so.
2006-09-11 11:02:43 · answer #10 · answered by Kristen H 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋