Does our presence simply make things worse? Rumsfeld is gone because our solution was military and not diplomatic. John Murtha was right. Iraq is a puzzle that cannot be solved with force. We have to solve it with careful thought and dialog. The biggest advocates of war are those who never fought. I fought. Marine Corps:68-71. Semper Fi. Marine Corps birthday today.
2006-11-09 22:18:40 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Koalatcom: does that mean you are enlisting and heading over there to win the wa?. Good for you. I would go with you, but I served my time. Vietnam.
2006-11-09 22:24:52 · update #1
war not wa. sorry. My keyboard sticks. My kids eat over it.
2006-11-09 22:25:37 · update #2
Murtha is an idiot. The Iraqi people need time to stabilize their government and become strong enough to protect themselves from the terrorists.
Have you forgotten that the Iraqi people have defied death threats in order to vote for democracy?
The fact of the matter is that the situation in Iraq is better than the media suggests.
2006-11-10 01:22:11 · answer #1 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm not sure if there is. We may well be at the "damned if you do, damned if you don't" stage. As a non-American I don't give a damn about the oil, the weapons of mass destruction, or all the whining from the world's atheist hard left. Saddam was a murderous monster, during his wars, his tibal suppressions, his secret police terror campaigns, his temper tantrums, he murdered over 2,000,000. (This included 50,000 children incredibly brutally tortured to death in order to punish their parents.) If you fail to see the benefit to putting a stop to THAT then you are NOT truly Human......
I am glad he's gone, and the sooner he dangles at the end of a rope the better the world will be. I refuse to criticise the brave men and women of the US Armed Forces who put their lives on the line to remove this monster.
However, more and more I am in agreement with those who are questioning the way this war is being fought and the way the situation is being handled. The government from Bush, Rumsfeld down to the leaders in the Pentagon, keep bleeting that "we didn't know how strong the resistance would be," or how bad the ethnic divisions were or how well equipped the insurgents would be.
Well, my answer to all that is the same as it was for the WMD flap! WELL YOU (America's leaders) BLOODY WELL SHOULD HAVE KNOWN, LONG BEFORE YOU COMMITTED YOURSELF (AND YOUR COUNTRY, ARMED FORCES; ALLIES AND THE WHOLE MIDDLE EAST) TO A LONG POINTLESS, BLOODY LOSING WAR!
There were literally thousands of American-Iraqis who tried to volunteer as translators, civil advisors, consultants and so forth, who knew Iraq and the people, culture and the LANGUAGE. They were almost every single one turned down as "security risks." There were literally hundreds of Shi'ite clerics; Imams and Ayatollas; who welcomed the US forces as liberators and offered to work with and assist the US forces to get the ground situation under control. They were EVERY ONE rejected as possible "security risks!"
There were in Iraq over 1,000,000 soldiers and police, with a working command structure in place, already trained, already ARMED who the Pentagon wanted to use. This was rejected by the politicians because they didn't want any connection with the old regime and besides, they might have been, you guessed it, "security risks." So they just allowed 1,000,000 unemployed, desparate, hungry, trained and well-armed men to wander off.......
At the beginning over 70% of the population welcomed the US troops as liberators, NOW over 65% want them out. The "Insurgency" gets worse, more effective and bloodier BY THE DAY!
I'm not convinced that "resignation" is the answer here. Those American politicians and officials who have managed to take this victory and turn it into what is quickly becoming a messy defeat, should perhaps be actually looking at some serious jail time...... The charge would be Criminal Incompetance (to say the least).
The worst thing is that while to stay will be more Hell, to simply pull out may collapse Iraq and even other nearby nations into bloody civil war and terrorism. To leave now will be Total Victory for the Taliban, Al Qaeda, Osama bin Lauden, all Islamic Fascists everywhere and all those who believe in using terrorism as a tool of political and State policy.
2006-11-09 23:16:53 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, there is always hope for every crisis. All that country needs is regional support. And that should determine whether the US military should withdraw or not.
2006-11-09 22:28:31 · answer #3 · answered by Zabanya 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I have an idea. Lets just take all of their oil and move it somewere else. That way we can leave and just let people kill one another. It's not our problem right? We obviously don't care about the loss of human life. You don't hear about U.S. troops in Sudan do you?
2006-11-09 22:36:22 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Now the US have got a civil war going they can't really be expected to leave before the oil runs out, can they?
2006-11-09 22:24:54 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
I hope Gates isn't the Bushtard clone we suspect. We need change of direction, not continuity to a failed policy.
2006-11-09 22:34:00 · answer #6 · answered by Heroic Gesture 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No.
More to the point, why is the USA there ?
Why did the USA invade Iraq ?
2006-11-09 22:26:32 · answer #7 · answered by Cameron in OZ 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
no think we should retreat, give it to al qaeda and hope for the best...duhhhhhhhhh.
2006-11-09 22:21:35 · answer #8 · answered by koalatcomics 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
do we have any hope in bush
2006-11-09 22:27:45 · answer #9 · answered by hghazoly 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋