AGAINST IRAQ OR AFGHANISTAN.
2006-10-23 23:38:23 · 31 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
The war which we started, for no other reason except to bully other countries, well, no, it hasn't been won, and probably never will.
In fact, I think it's getting worse, with all the people over there hating us immensly and wanting us out of there, we're going to have this terrorist problem for a long, long time.
We invade their country, take down neighborhoods and countless innocent lives....FOR WHAT??????
What the heck are they trying to accomplish????
Nothing is getting solved. Nothing is getting better.
This "WAR" will never be won. It will just have to hopefully end someday.
2006-10-23 23:55:47 · answer #1 · answered by deb 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think you should first consider the AIM of say the invasion of/war against/war in Iraq.
The aim of the war in Iraq was simple.
Now look back and you will see:
1 It had nothing to do with "9/11"
2 It had nothing to do with WMD
3 It had nothing to do with neighbours secutiry
4 It had nothing to do with new/threat of new atrocities.
On the other hand, it is possible that it had 2 aims:
1 Establish and Demonstrate a new paradigm - Preventive strike
2 Establish Access to some of the richest oil fields in the world.
Preventive strike means striking in case something might happen, BEFORE anything happens. It's not like striking the loaded airplanes taxiing to go into your airspace before they take-off (that's Pre-emptive) but rather destroying before they are assembled upon delivery (just in case).
Has this been proved? Yes, undoubtedly. Everyone now knows the US can and will strike anywhere in the world by itself (not through a proxy, nor waiting for UN approval).
The result: the nuclear tests in North Korea who feared they could be next and need a deterrent.
Access to oil fields has been established. The 'democratic' government of Iraq is US friendly, amny contracts have been allocated to US companies or to the Coalition of the Willing (CoW); the Iraqi economy is on track to supplying oil and paying their contarcts debts to the US for many years to come.
Therefore I would say that the aims of the war on Iraq have been attained. All that is needed now is a way out without jeopardising the Access to oil if possible. (And if Iraqi oil is not assured, Mr Chavez has been playing with fire recently...).
So I would say, yes, Mr Bush has won the war in Iraq.
2006-10-24 01:25:48 · answer #2 · answered by ekonomix 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It depends on what the objectives were.
If the objectives were the complete destruction/annihilation of the two countries then the answer is yes.
If the objectives were to completely destroy the countries as a potential military threat to Israel or grab oil supplies then the current answer is yes.
If the objective was to install a "democracy" then the answer is no because 92% of Iraqis want the foreign troops to leave even though their "government" wants them to stay and faces "punishment" if they don't meet the targets set by the US.
Unfortunately, most of the US public is so mis-informed about the real issues that most would not know if they had won or lost.
The people of Iraq and Afghanistan have definitely lost - mostly their lives.
2006-10-24 00:10:17 · answer #3 · answered by Nothing to say? 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The President has put our military in a position that they can not win. History again repeats itself by showing that a guerrilla force supported by the people can resist a superior military occupation. We lost this war in Iraq because it was not justified, we did little to re-build the country, allot of civilians were killed because the insurgents hide among them, and our forces were so small that we left hundreds of ammunition depots and bunkers unsecured. With Saddam's iron fist, the shite and Sunni had no chance to fight among each other, and to show a smiling face, Saddam took revenge out on the Kurds. Another failure was not to train the new Iraqi Army and Police outside of Iraq which shown almost every day, new recruits are bombed and killed waiting for a job, and in addition many already in the chain of command are corrupt. A once outstanding show of our young men and women praised, crowds screaming in support, candy, flowers, American Flags, has now gone to hide the insurgents, spy on the Americans, and a civil war that was planned so well by Al Queda, the Bush Cabinet could not even realize it was happening.
Afghanistan was fully justified as a NATO mission to destroy the Taliban and Al Queda. Trapped in Tora Bora, our ill and ignorant defense secretary failed to commit US Rangers to surround Tora Bora, but left it up to 60 Special Forces, 10 CIA Paramilitary, and Afghanistan Tribal Leaders and Tribes. The result was simple, Osama bin Laden got away, and we are still fighting the Taliban and Al Queda. Again, no matter how hi-tech your army is, or how well trained, fighting a home made guerrilla force experienced with years fighting the Soviet Union has proved another failure in Bush's strategy.
Although Afghanistan has shown large signs of improvement in so far as a democratic government and standard of living, it still produces opium, and eastern Afghanistan is still held for the most part by the Taliban and Al Queda.
Our men and women in uniform fighting in these two places have won, simply by putting up with the conditions and ability to destroy the enemy, but Bush's ideology of going into Iraq at the same time US Forces were fighting in Afghanistan will be forever a very large tactical error. Saddam was a little "Napoleon" in a sand-box restricted by UN sactions from Gulf I, enforced by a US Brigade in Kuwait and Air and Naval Support...he was absoluteley harmless. We should of put 100% of our military might into Afghanistan/Pakistan, then if need be deal with Iraq.
2006-10-24 00:00:12 · answer #4 · answered by Fitforlife 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It sounds to me like you Americans don't even know why Bush has started this war. It is supposedly fighting terror not neccesarily Iraq or Afgan. In my opinion nobody wins in war. Thousands of people have been injured and millions killed that is both American, British and Asian. Some of the killed are children, innocent children, Mothers, Fathers. How do you justify that. This whole war is just one massive cover up by the Americans and for the Americans.
No one can win can they?
2006-10-24 00:06:40 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
The war on terror will last a lot longer than me. Iraq and Afghanistan are only the first battles.
As long as you have a group of insane people determined to take over the world in the name of their god, the war will rage on.
2006-10-23 23:59:01 · answer #6 · answered by Munster 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No way, they're still going on for a start! The good ol' US of A is just going to do what they do best - charge in, kill some folk (not always the enemy I might add), then retreat once they realise they haven't got a clue; leaving the rest of the UN to pick up the pieces. The sooner they ditch Bush the better!
2006-10-23 23:54:54 · answer #7 · answered by Bel 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No. Iraq has descended into civil war.An average of 100 Iraqis are killed EVERY DAY.
Bush has already started to change the way he speaks about Iraq.No more "stay the course".
As for Afghanistan.Since the invasion Afghanistan has now become the worlds largest producer of heroin.
2 examples of the excellent work done by this president
2006-10-23 23:52:47 · answer #8 · answered by rosbif 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The USA has easily the best military equipment in the world. They also have more of it than anyone else. Their troops are well trained and well cared for and there are plenty of them. Their morale is very high.
Its the high morale thing that I believe fails them. They are told that they are the best, and in many ways they are. But, when they get to theatre and are led by fat asred, cigar smoking armchair generals and things are NOTHING like what they have told, they get a very swift dose of reality. Their morale crumbles quickly and their fighting spirit, that was high, falls away as quickly as the invulnerablity they had been promised. It does not take long before their effectiveness declines. Its not the fault of the average grunt but the poor leadership that lets them down.
Mike Ex Brit squaddie.
2006-10-24 00:03:36 · answer #9 · answered by Imelda M 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Unfortunately...no and that's very sad for everyone (ALL the Iragi people...All the Afghanistan people... and ALL the soldiers from around the world)
And it's NOT just the American war. Britians..Canadians...Australians...and other countries are fighting in Irag and Afghanistan
2006-10-24 00:07:20 · answer #10 · answered by tweetybird92457 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋