the handwriting is on the wall, ( wonder where that expression came from ) , we are going to have nothing but bad options anyway. I don't think we belonged there in the first place.
2006-11-26 07:42:46 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
IMO the only real solutions are either:
a) get out now because we don't seem to be accomplishing anything
b) bite the bullet and increase troop levels dramatically (3-4X the current amount)
and the term "cut and run" is idiotic, the only purpose it serves is limiting the options for people to contemplate
for those of you that say "cut and run" would be disasterous, what's the point? Iraq is already a disaster, you are going to have to either fix the problem by sending in a much larger number of troops or get out, keeping things as they are is ALREADY disasterous
2006-11-26 07:50:29 · answer #1 · answered by Nick F 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Maybe the paramedics should run away when your mom needs help. It is a humanitarian thing at this point. If we left now they would live the oppressed lifestyle they have been living in the past. You libs are all about change, we are trying to change how Iraq is governed for the better, and all you can do is *****. There is no pleasing you fools. I could care less about being humanitarian, that is my point exactly you fool. I am surprised that you libs aren't backing the movement over there. We did not create the disaster they have been living in, it has been caused by the fascist dictatorship they have been under the rule of. If you asked me I would pull our troops out of every country, stop all foreign aid especially to Africa, stick all of our troops on the border, and when they run into disasters, fock em. But I am a heartless conservative.
2016-05-23 05:12:00 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The problem with "cut and run" is that it will not stay in Iraq. The terrorists will realize that the US is not capable of beating an insurgency and is therefore weak. If we send the message that we are weak it will encourage the terrorists to attack us because we don't have the stomach to tough it out. It is inviting more trouble than we had before. Whether or not we belonged there is no longer the problem. It is what we do while there that will determine their and our futures.
2006-11-26 10:47:22 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Regardless if we should have or should not have been in the country in the first place, at this point to "cut and run" would be disastrous.
It would embolden terrorists throughout the world and would be viewed as a great victory for them. The country would fall into utter chaos...if you think the amount of violence that occurs now is horrendous, imagine how it would be if there were no US forces there to help stem it. Imagine how it would be if there were not any US forces to help train the newly instated government in the proper ways to maintain prisons..If we "cut and run" all i can see happening is the creation of a new lawless state and breeding ground for international terrorists, and a huge area of violence and instability that may spread to other areas of the middle east...Imagine the thousands of supporters of the coalition forces that in all likelyhood would be lined up and shot, or worse. We owe it to the Iraqi people to get them out of the situation we got them into.
While it will not be easy, and may take a long time, it is very important that we do not leave until the Iraqis can at the very least hold their own.
2006-11-26 07:50:57 · answer #4 · answered by Bryan G 1 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Instead of using that term that has made a potential US withdraw sound so cowardly how about using "redeployment"? Send all US troops in Iraq to Afganistan first (where they are needed) and then start bringing most of them home slowly from there. Then it won't be cutting and running, they'll be out of the quagmire in Iraq, and most will come home very soon.
2006-11-26 07:49:27 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Duh, it's like Veitnam all over again. The troops have killed way to many civillians because they can't figure out who the enemy is. Now they all want U.S. out. Iraqi's blame pretty much all violence now on the occupation. Since the U.S. never hsd a plan to secure the peace, they can not start to heal and work it out for themselves now, until the occupiers leave. The number of Irqi civillian deaths is now almost reaching 700,000. That is just wrong. Dick Cheney and his friends have made enough money off everybodies sufering. Enough already.
2006-11-26 08:32:31 · answer #6 · answered by mary57whalen 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
There is NO "winning" even says the likes of Kissinger and now many OTHER right wingers, who wouldn't admit this was the foreign policy blunder of ALL time. Down with Dictator Dumbya!!!
2006-11-26 08:20:13 · answer #7 · answered by rhino9joe 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
It's a great idea if you want your children and grandchildren to kneel and face east at dawn everyday.
2006-11-26 07:45:32 · answer #8 · answered by Rich B 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
If you want to go theological on us, do you really think it will make any difference at this point?
I say we go out kicking butt.
2006-11-26 07:50:23 · answer #9 · answered by ? 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
no,civil war is already waging.if we leave now or leave 5 yrs from now the only diff is how many americans die.
2006-11-26 07:46:21 · answer #10 · answered by sasuke 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋