The Government can leave Iraq now with 2,715 dead and lose the war "OR" The Government can leave Iraq in 10 years with 58,000 dead and lose the war. It's your choice.
2006-10-02 12:06:56 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
They're no longer under the control of their evil dictator, their own King George. Let's leave. They have to rebuild their own country, it's their own duty. The French & Spanish didn't hold our hands for years afterwards. The U.S. built herself, on the blood, sweat, and tears of her people.
The Iraqis will respect their own country 1000+ times more if they have to build it themselves. Their own government, their own economy, their own healthcare & education systems. If we do it, they'll expect someone to bail them out the next time they get into a jam.
It's the Iraqi's country to make, not ours.
2006-10-02 12:24:46 · answer #1 · answered by amg503 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Actually, Bush declared the war "over" and mission accomplished a couple of years ago. What is going on now is called "post-war", so if it is post war you cannot lose the war because the "war" part is over. If this "post war" keeps on going then in ten years there will be close to half a million Iraqis killed by Iraqis, so Bush figures if it can be kept going long enough the Iraqis will kill themselves off. Then he can declare the "post war" over and an end to Iraq.
2006-10-02 19:13:24 · answer #2 · answered by Kokopelli 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The choice should be clear to anyone with any moral sense. To depart from Iraq now, and preserve the lives of as many soldiers as we can is not cowardly or unpatriotic, as many Republicans claim, but it is in fact the best thing we can do for our servicemen and our country. What good is a dead soldier, when he could better contribute to the economy by utilizing his skills to be productive? What good is a dead soldier to his family, when he could at least contribute to the rearing of his children and loving his wife? What good is a dead soldier, when what he died for had nothing to do with thwarting terrorists?
The truth is nothing is more patriotic than wanting the best for those who serve our country. To insist they stay in a futile war, is a sentiment born of pride, greed and selfishness. So we lost the war in Iraq. So what? Isn’t it better to admit a wrong doing, and work to reverse that wrong doing by retreating, than to persist in that wrongdoing, effectively exacerbating our predicament? I have stated this ad nauseam, and I will state it again. We cannot fight a war on terrorism using the conventional methodology we utilize to fight traditional wars. There is no territory to be gained, and there is no top official of these separate terrorist cells that will negotiate a surrender on their behalf. So how do we define victory? The truth is, there is no exact measure for victory. That is why the war on terror will always have an indefinite lifecycle, and our continued insistence on fighting this idiotic war, will result in the perpetual and needless loss of life on both sides.
Republicans are quick to brag about their superior morality and their elevation of pro-life initiatives. What could be more pro-life than wanting our men to live so that they can do something positive? What could be more moral than desiring that our men stop being used as killing machines for war profiteering?
2006-10-02 19:29:33 · answer #3 · answered by Lawrence Louis 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Why do you assume the only choice is we lose the war? Are you that brainwashed by the liberal hacks that you don't want us tho win? 2,715 vs 4,000 dead by their own words (Al Queda) If we kill enough they will have trouble recruiting people for thier radical cause. But if we leave now they will see it as a sign of weakness and hit us again harder and harder. You apparently don't understand the people we are fighting. And it is not just Iraqis they are killing each other and we are fighting people coming from Saudi Arabia Syria Lebanon Iran and places like that.
2006-10-02 19:14:03 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
LOL. I love the questions Erudite. Excellent. In a ground war, the Iraqis would kill em'. The Americans get technology handed to them on a silver platter and can take out anyone. Take that Korean technology away and they are chicks wanting to get home to watch football on Sunday...
2006-10-06 15:29:39 · answer #5 · answered by Mark Bingham 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Iraq is not another Vietnam, if we dont take care of the problem now it will just resurface later...then who knows how many americans will die then....okay!...yeah so if you really cared for this country support our troops and our government, after all your opion doesnt matter
2006-10-02 20:58:42 · answer #6 · answered by lovin' you 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think that the U.S. government should protect our own air, water, and land space - and get out of Iraq now. This is like another Vietnam - people dying senselessly.
2006-10-02 19:11:12 · answer #7 · answered by Holiday Magic 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I think it's time now to leave the problems of Iraq to the Iraqi people - also, it's Iran's chance to settle some old scores - let someone elses people die for a change.
2006-10-02 19:09:02 · answer #8 · answered by Fun and Games 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I'll pick what's behind War Number One for 3000 KIAs....
and the question is ?
Anyone who bought into this war is either having second thoughts or brain locked.
2006-10-02 20:23:29 · answer #9 · answered by planksheer 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
First of all, we won't be there for 10 years just because we don't leave right now. We are not going to lose 58,000 people. It just won't happen. Stop over dramatising it.
2006-10-02 19:29:06 · answer #10 · answered by Curt 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋