meaning NO terrorists haven in Iraq, would the American people be happy with that or would they be upset that their own military didn't do it?
2006-11-10 13:07:10 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Honestly, whether the U.S. military leaves or not, Iraq is bound to have a bloody next 5-10 or even 20 years. And for what?
FOR WHAT???
2006-11-10 13:11:33 · answer #1 · answered by RockiesFan 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If we leave Iraq before it's stabilized, there will be more turmoil there which may be like Lebanon. The way the Middle East will stabilize, is when there is another big attack on the US. The Iranians and the Sunni Jihadis are vying for dominance over the entire population of Muslims. In their eyes, this war has been on-going for centuries. What makes Americans happy is not the important thing in this instance. It's how to get Iraq and Afghanistan, and Lebanon, stabilized and how to prevent further expansion of the unrest. Aren't Sudan, Chechnya, Cashmere, Thailand and the Philippines problem enough? Those countries are under continuing attacks by Jihadists.
The recent coup in Thailand was carried out by a Muslim general, but no one wants to mention that.
2006-11-10 13:21:55 · answer #2 · answered by Susan M 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Of course the American people would be happy with that outcome. It is just not feasible at this point.
Whether people want to believe it or not, the new Iraqi govt. is incapable of maintaining sovereignty and wiping out all of the terrorist cells at this point. If they tried, the insurgents would likely get backing from one of the half dozen or so countries who sympathize with them. In ten years, we would be right back where we started.
2006-11-10 13:14:22 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I myself would be grandly happy that all our troops didn't sacrifice their lives at the non-mercy of jacked-up relentless terrorists. From the beginning,when the force of the rad-militia was much more pounding than expected-why didn't we just wage all-out war and see who's boss. It's a bad portend of the future when these guerrillas make demands and the world moves with fear.They were frenzied more re: the Pope incident but they can boast on satellite they hate US & Israel and act like it's to be accepted.
2006-11-10 13:27:21 · answer #4 · answered by spareo1 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No the Dem's would want to go back in to protect the terrorists, the same way we went in to Bosnia
2006-11-10 13:27:54 · answer #5 · answered by roger k 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'd be happy. I'd much prefer the Iraqis to take care of their own business rather than having us take care of it for them.
The less U.S. blood and treasure that has to be expended, the better.
2006-11-10 13:11:44 · answer #6 · answered by timm1776 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
We're not doing all this on our own. We're all working together with militia to hunt down terrorists. Believe me, right now, they need our help.
2006-11-10 14:10:37 · answer #7 · answered by Nancy D 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If we were to C&R there would be vaccume filled with militias and it would be complete kaos rather than bearly contrloed kaos.
2006-11-10 13:10:44 · answer #8 · answered by opitmdotcom 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
upset that their own military didn't do it? .... Didn't and could't is two things hope you know the difference
2006-11-10 13:20:05 · answer #9 · answered by Ibredd 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋