Something tells me that even if the Congress is in the Democratic party for the next ten years that we will still presue trying to stablize Iraq before we slowly pull out our forces.
but what are your thoughts
2006-11-08 15:36:11 · 10 answers · asked by Gamla Joe 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
I guess igi has never heard of Turkey
2006-11-08 15:41:46 · update #1
America's stance on Iraq has ALREADY changed, and that's why "we the people" recently elected a new Congress that looks the way it does. Hopefully, Congress will work the way it's supposed to now while it determines the U.S.' moral obligation to the Iraq it helped to destabilize (from way back in the 80's when the U.S. was busy EMPOWERING Saddam Hussein). Hopefully, statesmen will listen to one another and to their constituents for a change.
2006-11-09 06:29:15 · answer #1 · answered by miraclewhip 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Iraq is one of those things much easier to start than to finish. Now that we have destabilized the country we have an obligation to provide the support necessary to let them get back on their feet. If not the entire middle east is at risk and most likely will follow the same path. At that point the rest of the world will find out just how important oil is. We have no honorable choice than to pull out slowly if we can't find someone else the finish the job we started. At some point we may learn to accept that we can't win at civilian warfare. Russia, Israel, or North Korea would be much better at that.
2006-11-08 23:45:11 · answer #2 · answered by dano 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bush wants us to win. I'm not sure yet what winning is to him. I would hope that Congress would not pull out the troops too quickly. We made a mess so we should clean it up. If we leave it a mess people will hate us probably even more. So if you have Bush wanting us to stay longer and congress/senate wanting us to pull out hopefully they will reach a middle ground also known as common sense and take the troops out in the best way possible. We need to go back to taking care of ourselves of course not pre-WWII isolationists but aware of our own weaknesses so we don't have to remain on the offensive all the time.
2006-11-08 23:51:15 · answer #3 · answered by b 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bush IS still the president even if Rumsfeld is stepping down. I dont expect a dramatic change in Iraq. It would not surprise me though if we set up some kind of informal time table for eventual withdraw sometime before Bush leaves office.
2006-11-08 23:45:07 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
We went into Iraq to find Saddam Hussein
mission accomplished
this idea of democracy in Islam is false
there is no democracy in Islam
time to come home
sorry for the 3,000 lost lives in Iraq and Afghanistan
The King of Saudi Arabia is the protector of the holy Islamic sites
Deal with him if there are any terrorist problems
We are not going to find the 500 million plus terrorists
2006-11-08 23:40:39 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Iraq and Iran is a problem countries that can't be solve in 10 years.Given democrat party handling the terrorist on their last term.(clinton)
2006-11-08 23:45:03 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think they'll try to do something. The president has veto power, though, and he will have to work with them.
If the new congress doesn't do something acceptable to the people, they won't have a chance in 2008; so that will be part of their motive and the other is to get our soldiers out of there.
2006-11-08 23:41:15 · answer #7 · answered by nobluffzone 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think they will set more goals and get more done by making some demands to meet those goals. It is still going to take time, because we are in deep.
2006-11-09 00:11:25 · answer #8 · answered by Cub6265 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think they'll turn tale and run
2006-11-08 23:45:01 · answer #9 · answered by justcurious 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
i think the AMERICAN TROOPS WILL BE HOME SOONER THAN YOU THINK
2006-11-08 23:51:17 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋