War doesn't end when all of one side is dead. Well, it would, but it never comes to that. Eventually, one side realizes that they've had enough, and they give up. If the politically correct crowd would allow us to use our force and squash the terrorists like the bugs they are, this would almost be over by now.
The problem with this war is that we are not fighting a country and army that has ethics and standards. They don't fight in uniform, they don't carry their weapons in the open, they don't fight on behalf of a country. Those things are all required to be covered under the Geneva convention, by the way.
These jerks hide in the shadows and kill innocent civilians and children on purpose - just for shock value. The only way to stop them is for them to be too terrified of what we'll do to them if they're captured. They're already willing to die for their cause, but they're not willing to be tortured. Unfortunately, our bleeding hearts won't let us torture them, so they have absolutely no fear of us. They will continue until we can make them afraid.
2006-09-29 08:55:46
·
answer #1
·
answered by FozzieBear 7
·
0⤊
3⤋
According to the National Intelligence Estimate if the US prevails in Iraq it will mean a huge decrease in Islamic radicalism. By staying the course and helping the (voter elected ) Iraqi government take control of its country the Ji hadist will lose their popularity with young radicals. Most of the radicals will not follow the Islamic fascist once they are not seen a a strong force against the US and Iraqi troops. Which will limit the recruits and spread their followers , weakening their offense. This is the Republican policy.
By pulling our troops out of Iraq , we give the Islamists a stunning victory over the world's greatest military power. That's the strategy of the Democratic Party. Just how do you think that one would work out for us?
2006-09-29 09:12:47
·
answer #2
·
answered by bereal1 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
The least we can do is fight terrorst to prevent another 9/11 from happening. I don't think reasoning with them or finding another solution then killing them would work. They want us dead or converted to Islam. Their are no other alternatives for them. It's either one or the other so...... I say we keep fighting the war on terrorists as long as we have to to keep all the people in the US safe from another attack.
2006-09-29 09:05:44
·
answer #3
·
answered by SGT 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Andrew D, we can't. This war on terror is a talking point for George Bush and nothing more. He is creating more terrorist then we can kill.
2006-09-29 09:00:57
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
We will never be able to "kill" all murders, rapists or other criminals either - but what would happen if we just stopped trying.
As the terrorists don't want us in their lives - we don't want them in ours. Negotiating isn't going to work - we've tried.
Just as any criminal or groups of destructive individuals, we will have to find them and level their fields one by one - and yes, forever. We will do this just as we have for centuries.
2006-09-29 09:19:31
·
answer #5
·
answered by Paige2 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
we cant,,, George W Bush should have been thinking more logically for the sake of US troops,,, what is their mission,, they are staying the course,, whats the course,,, since Iraq was invaded,, the confusion grows,,, troops had to dig trenches around the city of Baghdad,, to control the exits and entrances,,, is it working or too little too late,,,, the homeless man that took hostages in the Colorado school, this week, raped several girls and killed one,, isn't he a terrorist,,,, what is the definition of terrorism,,,, I suppose all American citizens will have to carry guns,,, and shoot anyone who scares them or seems threatening
2006-09-29 09:09:52
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
We have to address the reasons why people want to attack us. It's not because they "hate our freedom" - the WTC happened because we have military bases on Muslim Holy Lands.
Shall we: bomb everyone and everything and kill and kill and kill?
or: Try to fix the root problems we have with people who want to kill us and try to alleviate the tensions?
Repubs think kill kill kill no mercy.
Dems think figure something else out.
As for torture; we CANNOT torture prisoners, it opens our soldiers up for more torture and it DOESN'T WORK. People will say anything when they are tortured. "Bleeding hearts??" We don't want OUR SOLDIERS to be tortured. And you cannot treat people badly who might well be innocent.
Mr. Kool-Aid Man, I don't think you understand. You're saying the whole KILL KILL KILL thing which is something that is not helping. GWB got the memo about Osama determined to attack within USA and HE did nothing. Now we are attacking Iraq - WHY? Being as big of a jerk as the jerk who is attacking you is NOT the way. It's a schoolyard way of acting.
It's all about money, and the ones who are winning are GWB and his rich buddies at Halliburton.
There were no suicide bombers and insurgents in Iraq until we got there. Now we are doing them a big favor by overthrowing them so no more will join?
2006-09-29 08:57:00
·
answer #7
·
answered by smartbunny 3
·
3⤊
1⤋
we are at a time when the advisers who are a different breed, they come from highly educated and studied field of coercive trends in psychologies. we have to start with the bullies at your own kindergarten school and see if we can divert them and then see what can be from the knowledge that we can implement.there are more way than to get out of something than there are ways of getting it done. you have to know what your asking here. every third person darn near is a sociopath in behavior just to stand the common hatreds of those who raise them, most people confronted with animosity live some die at the very thought of being burdened with more of our American demands. we don't want this to happen to us and they don't want it to happen to them. they see one man with a candy bar in his hands and the other has a knife, now where do you see we took guns a way years ago to solve our problems but the gun did make people understand they had the right to protect themselves we are know living in the back wash of this change of not have guns to protect our selves and this is the consequences of it
2006-09-29 09:14:12
·
answer #8
·
answered by bev 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
You can win the war without completely eliminating the threat. We need to follow Britain's example with the IRA (a great success), which the Bush Administration is ignoring!
2006-09-29 08:59:42
·
answer #9
·
answered by Rwebgirl 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
smartbunn- the Dems had there chance for 8 years under Clinton what happened - 9/11 did, so I don't think your, "figure something out" plan is or will work. While we are on that subject, Saddam wiped his azz with 13 of the UN's "figure something out" plans and he continued to terrorize his own country, well you know what we finally got a president who said, "enough" here what you need to do, if you don't then we are coming in, he chose plan B and we took his azz out, that's way it works, the policy of appeasement does not work when you are dealing with people like we are now that have an end game of die or die trying to die, either way they win unless you help them along in their little quest without being harmed yourself.
2006-09-29 09:03:19
·
answer #10
·
answered by jasonzbtzl 4
·
0⤊
2⤋