They shouldn't have invaded Iraq on first place............because it only bought deaths..........and as they have invaded iraq it is time for them to leave because staying there not only increses death tools but also haitret.............
2006-10-17 03:56:47
·
answer #1
·
answered by Ozzy 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
This is the current challenge for US policy makers. They went in to Iraq without an exit policy. Now they are embroiled in an unending war and the nightmare of body bags back home and a substantial increase in National Debt. It is better for US to exit as quickly as they can. They have to optimize this problem. Leave Iraq in some semblance of stability. It will be most unfortunate if a civil war breaks out and Iraq breaks up in to Kurdistan, Shia-Iraq and Sunni-Iraq. This will further increase the instability. Kurds would like to have a bigger Kurdistan together with their brothers in Iraq and Turkey and so on.
2006-10-17 10:43:36
·
answer #2
·
answered by openpsychy 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
I don't think we really should have been in the first place..
but since we started something there, stability and peace has to be upheld. It's not quite there yet, so I feel that they should stay a little longer, otherwise the same event as what happened with Afghanistan occurs in Iraq, and the whole thing was for naught.
2006-10-17 10:34:21
·
answer #3
·
answered by Southpaw 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
I suppose that depends on why the US is there in the first place. The stated objective was to rid Iraq of WMDs. That goal has long since been achieved. No-one can give a coherent answer to the question; "what are we trying to accomplish in Iraq", because the guy in charge is a muddle-headed moron in need of impeachment.
It's long past time to get out of Iraq. The pretenses were known to be false before the US ever went in.
2006-10-17 10:34:36
·
answer #4
·
answered by lenny 7
·
3⤊
3⤋
Wrong category, but we shouldn't have been there in the first place. We probably have dug a hole we can't get out of. I want to see us get out of Iraq. But I think the only way we will get out of Iraq is by attacking Iran or Korea and moving the troops from one venue to the other.
2006-10-17 10:32:52
·
answer #5
·
answered by AuroraDawn 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
There is a difference between getting out and kicked out. the US government will prefer the later version of withdrawal and that is to be kicked out of Iraq. Dishonesty never prevails!!
2006-10-17 10:47:06
·
answer #6
·
answered by miamian 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
What was gained from the exercise but a decrease in the security of the world, the deaths of thousands of soldiers and civillians, and a huge increase in prices of everything in the US? It was past time to get out before Georgie sent our people in. This war is just because he wanted to avenge his father's failure. I am happy that the dictator Saddam was removed from power, but at what cost? At what cost?
vicsikix. . .what was the job?
2006-10-17 10:36:44
·
answer #7
·
answered by Smiley 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Never should have gone into Iraq in the first place and we should send those responsible for selling the lies that led us there to places where they can count the number of times their cellmates rape them.
2006-10-17 10:42:27
·
answer #8
·
answered by iknowtruthismine 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Iraq is now embroiled in a civil war. I believe we made a huge mistake and a huge mess, and that we had a moral responsibility to help clean it up -- however, when the country turns inward and starts to battle a civil war, our moral obligation is over until they find peaceful resolution and request our presence again with a unified voice.
*hugs southpaw resolutely*
2006-10-17 10:36:00
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
No, it is not time yet They need our help to build a democracy
Ask our volunteer soldiers, They are proud of what they do. I
know my 26 year old nephew first a lieutenant just died a month ago.
2006-10-17 10:45:06
·
answer #10
·
answered by gwhiz1052 7
·
1⤊
2⤋