I feel we are just wasting lives, time and money in this war. We are more or less just kitty footing around. Bush states that Iraq is not undergoing a civil war but it is!
2006-09-15 06:45:13 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
If you define success as establishing democratic governments that interact peacefully with each other and provide us with all the oil we want...then the goal is impossible.
We have two interests in that region - oil and Israel.
First, we have to have a "project" funded by the government and private industry that eliminates the need for oil. This won't likely happen because people are still getting rich from oil. But if it did happen, the need for our presence in that region would be removed.
Second, the Israel issue needs to be addressed, and I think it would go a long way if they gave back occupied lands and began negotiating a lasting peace with their neighbors.
Without the resources to wage war, Arab states will likely slip into the background and have little efect on the world scene. They will go the way of former empires who based their power in things like spices and silk and retreat into obscurity.
2006-09-15 07:14:16 · answer #1 · answered by jack b 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In Iraq we should get them to break up the country into 3 separate countries. The kurds in the north already have for all practical purposes. They even run ads on TV asking for investors saying invest in kurdistan the other Iraq! Then if they still want to kill one another be my guest. Iran that's a lost cause national pride is on the line there and come hell or high water they are going to get there bomb. Whats more I don't see why they shouldn't have one as Pakistan a Muslim country already has them ,so whats the difference? As for Afghanistan That is salvageable IF we move our troops from Iraq to Afghanistan and set up fire bases all along the southern border to keep out the Taliban. Then reconstruction inside the country can happen without too much interference. I would then propose a very big project that would be aimed at the poverty problem. This project would involve the building of a highway and railroad system from the east coast of china all the way to europe and the middle east. In this project Afghanistan becomes a transportation hub and there are many business opportunities in transport hubs. Hotels,restaurants and truck repair to name a few. If there making money then there not fighting. I would also make Iraq and Palestine into such hubs. Whata ya think of this Idea coming from a mega liberal.
2006-09-15 07:10:13 · answer #2 · answered by brian L 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This is just a mock answer, don't take it seriously please.
It takes about $12 to recruit a Taliban soldier. If we multiply that by 5 and offer them $60 to stay away and/or turn their weapons in, I think most of those poor souls would jump at the opportunity. That is off-course with a plan to make sure they are not betraying us. Then we would win, since $60 is nothing compared to the numbers that are being spent out there, and they would win $60 each. The world would win too in some way.
Worth a shot I'd say.
2006-09-15 07:31:23 · answer #3 · answered by Visanza 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
properly, the conflict with Russia/Afghanistan substitute into provide up the U.S. from increasing. It substitute into the chilly war, and it substitute into deemed needed to maintain the pink danger out of the area. the different conflicts are for genuinely 2 reasons: a million. Human rights violations and war crimes consisting of Iraq employing deadly gas on Kuwait. 2. Oil, and an outstanding variety of it. the steadiness of the area is extremely significant by using fact it relatively is the a significant source of oil, and oil is the main significant source of noticeably a lot each and everything contained in the admired monetary device. If the entire area collapses into war then the charges will skyrocket which will impact the U.S. monetary device.
2016-10-01 00:00:51 · answer #4 · answered by wiemer 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm not one of historys best known strategic thinkers but it occurs to me that it would be a bloody good idea if you finished one war before starting the next.
Afghanistan was and still is the priority. Iraq may or may not have been right but the timing was badly wrong.
2006-09-15 07:16:59 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The best way would be to step back a little, start a number of think tanks on the subjects and start to wining the heart and minds of the local people down there instead of try to win every firefight in a endless number of such engagements. This war is not won by the one that is droping the most bombs and shooting the most bullets, its won by thoose that win the population to their side and stops the killing. Easy? Nope! Johan
2006-09-15 09:00:31 · answer #6 · answered by Johan from Sweden 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Withdrawal
2006-09-15 18:18:44 · answer #7 · answered by brainstorm 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Kick all the ruddy reporters and bleeding heart liberal watchdogs out on their @$$ and let the military do what it is trained to do and does do best: Kill the damned enemy and break his toys. We almost guarantee our defeat when we hold our brave men to impossibly high standards of behavior, while we fight a ruthless, immoral, and completely evil enemy who will stoop to anything to win.
2006-09-15 07:10:57 · answer #8 · answered by Mad Roy 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Consolidate our forces in the outskirts.
Leave it up the Iraqi military and Iraqi government for a while.
Do random sweeps throughout either confiscating and destroying all weapons or killing those who refuse to give them up.(obviously uniformed Iraqi police and army are exempt.)
Keep doing this until they get it right themselves.
2006-09-15 06:54:25 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
500,000 men on the ground, take the neighborhood and keep it. Then turn it over to the iraqis.
We are just going in circles now.
2006-09-15 06:48:15 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋