Cut and run? Stay? Phased withdrawal? 3 state solution?
2006-10-24 22:49:29 · 18 answers · asked by chad 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Phased withdrawal is the only possible solution without losing too much face. And of course, proceeding as planned with the three state division.
2006-10-24 22:51:21 · answer #1 · answered by Avatar13 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Folks exert some sanity!
For the Sake of discussion I concede all arguments about who caused the war, who mismanaged the effort and who did or didn't lie.
My point is ALL of these arguments are irrelevant at this stage in the game. Doesn't matter if we were right or wrong in starting it. The cold hard fact is we did start it right or wrong and we hold a moral obligation to the people of Iraq as well as the world community to bring the situation to the best outcome not for the US but for the world community and the Iraqi people as a whole. Blame Bush and the republicans, Vote them out if you must. a 3 part state may be the answer or supporting the current government until it is able to exert control and civil law however long it takes. My point is it is we the people of America that hold responsibility to the people of Iraq to resolve this situation satisfactorily. and I mean all the people Dem. and Rep. while individually you may or may not of voted for Bush as a people we elected him and are responsible for the actions of that government. running away and letting the situation degenerate would be an inexcusable aborting of your and our responsibility. think hard folks! if you thought the Taliban was abhorrent imagine a fundamentalist anti western state with the resources of the 2nd largest oil reserves in the Persian gulf.
I do not have all the answers but I do know that withdrawal of our support is not an option. call it phased withdrawal or cutting and running depending on your politics
Several times in our history we abandoned people after making commitments, Somalia, Beirut, Vietnam in every case the people were worse off for it. You may say it is not our problem, but, right or wrong we caused the current situation and it now is the problem of We the people. To put it more bluntly We had that baby now it is our obligation to raise it.
2006-10-24 23:27:07 · answer #2 · answered by sooj 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Send all troops to both borders...the one with Iran and the other with Syria. No US troops inside middle of Iraq. The troops should make sure that no one enters or leaves Iraq. No guns; no people. Then, let the Sunnis and Shiites battle it out reducing Iraq to ruins and sending all of the Holy Muslims to heaven to be greeted by their 72 virgins. Then when there are only twenty or thirty people remaining, there will be peace, but don't count on it. If there are 20 Sunnies and 15-20 Shiites it may go to the last man.
2006-10-24 23:11:54 · answer #3 · answered by wunderkind 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A phased timely withdraw sounds good, we should withdraw now into the "green zones" and protect our troops while doing so. Let Iraq rebuild Iraq, asa they seem to blow up what we try to build, l;et us take , yes take a whole lot of oil from them for our costs, gee that makes us the bad guy, but we are already seen as that. We have to get something out of it for us. Tell the Saudi's and the other Opec nations in the region unless you cut the price, here we are and we will take your oil
2006-10-24 23:01:09 · answer #4 · answered by paulisfree2004 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Total withdrawal from Iraq is the right solution to save money for domestic affairs.
2006-10-24 22:51:34 · answer #5 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Phased withdrawal and a massive apology for interfering in the affairs of a sovereign nation.
Yes, Saddam was a scumbag, but there's plenty of other bullies running countries without the fear of Allied intervention...
2006-10-24 22:52:31 · answer #6 · answered by 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
stay until saddam is found guilty and locked away for the rest of his life. If they execute him, there will be a war like you haven'tseen since thenazis because the muslims, even his victims will call him a martyr for islam. then the best bet would be an immediate withdrawal followed by a few small nukes. because unfortunately, tht will be the only way to stop a world war fought over religious fanatics.
2006-10-24 23:00:35 · answer #7 · answered by judy_r8 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Let the people of Iraq state their view and desire for what we should do. If USA stays much longer it might be seen as a war machine waiting to attack somewhere else in the area, which would serve to kill several million of the most radical Muslim fighters, at the USA citizen's expense.
2006-10-25 04:53:55 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I can't speak for the "average American", but as for the above-average let me say that if America is not defeated in Iraq, the democrat party is toast.
2016-03-28 06:59:06 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I doubt we really have a better choice then to stay put and clear up the mess we created. Though getting rid of Saddam wasn't all THAT bad an idea.
2006-10-24 22:57:24 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋