English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Shouldn't that be the issue we all focus on when it comes to Iraq? I feel things might progress a lot more smoothly if Congress, both sides of the aisle, would stop playing the blame game over what happened 5 years ago, and instead concentrated on the objectives at hand. Living in the past will not help move this country forward into the future.

2006-10-06 14:59:30 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

Let's not forget that it was not only the Republicans who believed in the false information. Many a Democrat, and most of the high ranking ones, also believed Iraq had WMDs.

But this is exactly what I'm saying, concentrating on who believed what and backed what doesn't matter now. Finishing the job so that our troops can come home is the only important thing right now.

2006-10-06 15:09:33 · update #1

21 answers

Pigpen:

How refreshing it is to see an intelligent question for a change.

I believe that the phenomenon you refer to is because there are a certain number of people who have an absolute hatred for President Bush, and they take every opportunity at their disposal to criticize him and his administration.

You are correct. We are there now, so why really is a moot point. It is costing our country vast amounts of money and the lives of our fine, young, service members so instead of this stupid, petty, partisan bickering we should be trying to arrive at a plan to leave the Iraqi people with a stable government, and then leave them to run their own affairs.

2006-10-06 15:15:59 · answer #1 · answered by Peedlepup 7 · 1 1

The problem in Iraq is that you cannot bring democracy by gunpoint. It never has worked and never will. Soooooo... what to do? Immediate and complete withdrawal? What would be the outcome of that at this point? A full blown civil war which would bring in all the geopolitical interests of that region (Iran for instance). We could take that chance and see what happens. What's the worse thing that could happen as a result? We'd lose our geopolitical influence and/or control in the region. Which is the fancy way of sayin' we'll lose access to the oil.

Okay, so say we stay. What then? Get a mission other than nation building, like say uhhhh, I dunno, how about peace-keeping? Get a solid international coalition. Get enough troops in there so they aren't playin' whack a mole with the trouble makers and killin' folks by the thousands (4,ooo Iraqi Policeman killed - that's not good). In other words, **** or get off the pot. Don't let it be another Vietnam.

Just my two cents.
++++++++++++++++
Your question: We are an intelligent species, we are capable of criticizing and working towards replacing corrupt governments while we plan a smart war or peace.

Oh yea, impeach Cheney, then Bush. They should be held accountable for misleading us into this war. If the intelligence reports provided to the Congress were as spiked, censored, edited, and re-written as all the other inconvenient reports this administration has 1984'd, they still should have done their homework or need to explain why they couldn't. Democrats are not off the hook.
++++++++++++++

I like the quotes above, but here's one from the other side from Powell at a 24 February 2001 visit to Cairo, Egypt. Answering a question about the US-led sanctions against Iraq, the Secretary of State said:

"He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq..."

And Rice...."But in terms of Saddam Hussein being there, let's remember that his country is divided, in effect. He does not control the northern part of his country. We are able to keep arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt. "

2006-10-06 15:54:56 · answer #2 · answered by Lisa M 3 · 1 0

The reasons were sound enough, although a lot of people choose to ignore them. It is really quite simple: Iraq had WMD -- it had used them. Iraq was required by the cease fire agreement and a dozen UN resolutions to get rid of them in an accountable matter -- it didn't. (Saddam secretly shipped most of the material to Syria starting in June 2002 when the pressure got too intense.) The idea of Saddam having such weapons was not and is not acceptable. Saddam planned to stage a biological and chemical attack against Israel; the only reason that it did not happen was because of the beginning of the Gulf war, which made it impossible to deliver such weapons. See reference for much more on this.

Now that we are there, we need to be sure that the job is finished. If we don't, the al Qaeda types will take over, and resume work on WMD, and then we will really have problems.

2006-10-06 15:25:42 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

That position has been pounded and pounded by the Democrats in hopes of gaining political advantage. It has seeped into the national debate as if it were now relevent.

I maintain that if everyone could have kept their mouths shut and projected a picture of national unity, the terrorists would not be so convinced that they can win. If half the people in the US want to bring the troops home now, why would any self-respecting terrorist want to go against the odds of getting a majority vote. They would really make hay if we were to leave. No matter how bad it gets, we have to win or it will only be worse.

I wonder why the press is so much against going beyond the easy headline.

2006-10-06 15:16:44 · answer #4 · answered by united9198 7 · 1 1

The fact is, we're there and we have no business there and we are losing. How many Americans needlessly died today? 23? And for what? The US can't be the policemen to the world - Iraq is going to break out into a civil war any day now if it hasn't already - time to bring the troops home and save more American lives. And, its time for that effin' idiot Bush to admit he made a major mistake and ask the American people for forgiveness.

2006-10-06 17:05:45 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

I don't believe I or any one else knows why we are there in the first place.As ordinary citizens,we will probably will never know the truth. But I agree, we are there for what ever reasons. Also I agree we should do all we can to rectify the present situation. The only way I know to do this is to let our politicians know how we feel and to vote intelligently.Blaming and ranting only makes the problem worse. Our present politicians do not seem to know what to do. Let's vote in politic ans who will intelligently try to solve the problem.

2006-10-06 15:16:17 · answer #6 · answered by blindogben 3 · 2 0

my biggest problem now is... there are no goals or purpose for Iraq... we will never leave under current leadership, because they don't even know what they want to achieve to leave...

you can't "concentrate on the objectives at hand" when there are no objectives...

how about a plan and a course of action... currenlty it's "stay the lack of course"

2006-10-06 15:16:20 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

They are the same people who would consider Clinton, or any other Democrat, a hero had they had the Nads to fight the Islamic Fascists. A lot of people think we are at war with Iraq. Wrong! We are at war with the Islamic Fascists, who just happen to be in Iraq.

2006-10-06 15:22:01 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

some human beings basically seem to have the skill to speak extra suitable than others. It basically proves that individuals frequently are not from now on clever thinkers as they was once. The bandwagon result basically pulled all of them in. once you look on the subject concerns of which you vote for a candidate, and you get right down to the simplicity of those subject concerns; each and every so often you do no longer see the completed photograph. the skill to think of severely has been lost someplace down the line and human beings basically are not finding for the ulterior reasons of a controversy anymore. If basically positioned, it sounds appropriate; they choose for it. "we are actually not questioning of the implications of our movements, we basically prefer to throw extra subject concerns on your face than you may throw back." "additionally, once you start up making valid factors, our communication is over." ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^... Does that sound like something you spot interior the "substitute Bandwagon?" actual. It makes me ill to my abdomen basically questioning approximately it. Has usa long gone daft?!?

2016-10-15 22:27:15 · answer #9 · answered by shade 4 · 0 0

EXACTLY..We are their, if we leave terrorist will gain confidence all over the world thinking they can win as long as they fight like panseys (How the Extremist in Iraq are fighting now)..

I think we went for the right reasons but unless your just plain retarded you know Iraq would go into utter chaos if we left now..Well leave in a mazimum of a hear and a half (Said the Iraqi Government)

2006-10-06 15:07:41 · answer #10 · answered by I Hate Liberals 4 · 2 2

fedest.com, questions and answers