English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

That is the REAL question. NOT whether or not WE get to FORCE-FEED the Iraqi people OUR brand of living.

2006-11-15 18:15:03 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

If the daily death toll will be LOWER, then we need to LEAVE and let the winner if THEIR war make the RULES for THEIR country. We have NO BUSINESS imposing OUR RULES on THEM. By leaving, we are spreading the most important thing; FREEDOM.

2006-11-15 18:21:07 · update #1

"believing Iraq is now truly theirs"

Uh, Iraq is TRULY THEIRS. It certainly isn't OURS and Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11 nor did they have any WMD's.

What sort of FOOL thinks so arrogantly?

2006-11-15 18:27:55 · update #2

If tensions/all out killing has been going on for 1400 to 2000 years, what sort of MORON would think our presence there for even 100 years would make a difference? Unless of course, if we KILL ZEM ALL. You pro-stay the course people are BIZARRELY STUPID. Sorry. Didn't mean to offend anyone, but READ THE CRAP you are SPEWING.

2006-11-15 18:44:48 · update #3

8 answers

It would be lower *when* we withdraw from Iraq.

2006-11-15 18:24:14 · answer #1 · answered by Nancy 6 · 1 1

The death toll will be higher - our presence is not what is fueling sectarian violence and don't be fooled that is what the killing is about we are just a coincidental excuse for tensions that have been around for 1400 years. It will escalate even higher with out the additional armed presence in Iraq. What is interesting is that this potential civil war would have happened in the 80's with Iran backing the Iraqi Shiites if the US hadn't supported Iraq in the Iran Iraq war. If we pull out now it will turn in to a full blown civil war with the Shiite majority in Iraq winning with the backing of Iran. That is unless the Sunni majority in the rest of the Arab world steps in to put an end to the Shiite branch of Islam once and for all.

2006-11-16 02:33:48 · answer #2 · answered by Chief Mac 2 · 0 0

I believe the answer is a lower death toll. It seems the most killing is due to our presence. The hostage taking is to get us to leave. If we leave, the insurgent radicals won't need to continue killing innocent Iraqis. They didn't do it before. But I am not in favor of pulling troops out all at once. I am concerned about a civil/religious war and that is a good argument to argue for higher death toll.

2006-11-16 02:19:19 · answer #3 · answered by surfer2966 4 · 1 1

It will probably be worse. Right now, there is a lot of Sunni - Shiite fighting, but they are both fighting us (one side more than the other, but still...) If we (the referees) leave, they will take off the gloves and go after each other. There will be more bombings, more shootings and beheadings, and you know every country in the mideast is going to send it's fighters in there to try and wrestle control of the whole thing. Or, we could just stay and do the job right.

2006-11-16 02:37:25 · answer #4 · answered by Brian I 3 · 0 0

It will get considerably higher. There are two main armed camps there. The Sunnis and the Shiites are engaged in sectarian violence against one another. It would be a genecide for one or the other. Our presence there is actually quelling what will happen when we leave. They have actually been at war with one another for over 2000 years and regardless if we stay or go, it will continue. If there wasnt oil there, Iraq would be left to their own devices like many genecidal countries in Africa.

2006-11-16 02:29:36 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

on average it will probably be the same, or in fact worse. this should not be taken as a supporting statement for the war. my reasoning is that many of those responsible ofr recruiting new fighters and ohrcestrating attacks probably do not want american forces to leave. this is their opportunity to kill the yankees they dispise so much. and they would also see it as a victory and strive with god outwards believing Iraq is now truly theirs. the islamic movement is not, as many in the west believe, contained nationally.

2006-11-16 02:24:33 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Are you serious? I will answer your question just for $hits and giggles, it will be LOWER......I agree with you, we need to stop forcing our ideologies on Iraq.....

2006-11-16 02:18:35 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

lower for us higher for them.

2006-11-16 03:18:33 · answer #8 · answered by karl k 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers