Stay in Iraq or leave it ? Choose the right answer !?

Question

1-Stay . We can't leave free people in the hands of Qaida .
2-Leave . We'r not a daddy , any more . That's enough .
3- We must finish the people of Qaida , first ; then we leave .

Answer 1

We never should have gone there in the first place. Get the hell out!!

Answer 2

Isn't it clear for all by now that America and the UK won't succeed on their own? They've started this mess, remember? Al Quaida wasn't even in Iraq before they invaded. And "finishing the people of Quaida" is as moronic a concept as emptying the oceans with a spoon. Poverty + religion + foreign aggression will always insure a constant supply of brain washed "martyrs".

America can't leave now. But they've got to quite the school bully attitude, bring every regional powers to the table and focus them beyond their immediate interests. Which will be A LOT harder to do than bombing villages.

Answer 3

We can't win a war when the ones we're trying to help are busy destroying each other. We can't leave all at once because the terrorists will follow us here. Are you sure there is a right answer at this time? We tried to free a people of tyranny but they haven't stepped up to the plate to help themselves. I was in favor of getting rid of Hussein and AlQaida but we got more than we bargained for. I'm now in favor of protecting ourselves and letting them do the same.

Answer 4

Your question is super, for this reason you acquire super solutions. To distill down your question to what you're surely attempting to invite, you will possibly say, "what defines victory in Iraq for us, and what defines it for the international around us?" the rationalization I say that is because of the fact we are in all likelihood to define it in yet in a distinctive way than Iraq, as are different countries much less in contact. i'm going to respond to the 1st one, thinking that's the main in demand. Victory for us is defined as while we experience Iraq is in a very good place to help its very own economic equipment and government. what's unusual is that there is rather no brightline provided by using our government for the two of those. The Iraqis say they have already reached this element, that's controversial, yet u.s. has no properly-known to pass by using with the intention to declare they have reached this element or not. by using ways, that is been very almost 2000 days because of the fact the statement of "project performed" happened, and we are nonetheless there. So "victory" is controversial, even interior the administration.

Answer 5

1 we should build a base there and stay but not leave all of the soldiers in active duty let the majority come home we are not making anyprogress with the way it is going now anyway i say keep 3,000 there and keep on keeping on because we cant leave what would that accomplish but all the soldiers dying for nothing in a sence less war i dont think so

Answer 6

By "Qaida" I assume you mean al-Qaeda?

1) We can't morally leave them. They are not only vulnerable to al-Qaeda in its various manifestations, but they are vulnerable to insurgent violence ("insurgents" are both Shiite fighters coming across the Iraqi border from Iran to stir up the unrest in hopes of hurting the U.S plan and reputation, and also violent groups from within Iraq, rising against the troops, each other, and civilian populations). Right now, there is a small 'war' between Sunni Muslims and Shiite Muslims that has been going on for centuries in Iraq. . . .if we want peace in Iraq that needs to be resolved, and it won't be if we leave....it will just explode.

2) To believe we can just leave is naive, and shows a lack of political understanding. When you hear politicians say that, you can assume that they are underexperienced in international politics and in military history. Already, one day after the release of the Iraq Study Group report, it is being spoken of as naive by most quarters, when it describes how to pull out of Iraq.... the issue is extremely complicated.

But in short. . . as you say correctly, if we pull out we will leave a people we committed to protect UNprotected, they will die in far greater numbers than they do now. Moreover, and just as importantly, we will leave an unstable government and political system before it has had time to settle - and civil war WILL happen. It will then be our fault.

The biggest reason we can't just leave suddenly, and what many people have a hard time understanding. .. is how Iraq fits into the history and future of the unrest in the Middle East. Iraq is a big player in the Middle East. If it goes the way of democracy, it will go a long way toward slowing the growth of radical Islamofascist ideology of the sort growing in its neighbors. . like Syria and Iran next door.

People are just beginning to understand that if we as Western society continue to ignore the spread of miliant Islam, it will come to our shores (as the Europeans already know - they are suffering).

3) Well, we can't really "finish" al-Qaeda in Iraq. That isn't when much of it is. It's in the mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan, it's in the cities and villages and government gatherings in Iran, it's in Lebanon training with Hizbollah. . .it's in Europe, and hiding in the U.S. and Canada. . . . it's all over. But what we can do is create conditions in the Middle East that makes it difficult for al-Qaeda to get funding and places to train. In the long run that will work to stop them.

You need to understand that not only al-Qaeda is the problem. There are numerous little terrorist organizations in the Middle East (al-Qaeda is just one), and many are in Iraq. We can ruin their plans the same way we can ruin those of al-Qaeda: cut off funding, cut off governmental support, ruin popular support of the people for them.... a people living in improved conditions and freedom, will not look to al-Qaeda for solutions anymore.

So I yes, as you suspect, your 3rd option is the best, and most likely that is what you will see happen in months to come in Iraq. We will begin to bring troops home very slowly and gradually. We may shift around the jobs they are doing and where. But the final goal - changing the face of Iraq, and the Middle East, for a safer world for everyone - will not change as the primary goal of the U.S. and its western allies.

Mac at ASKEW
http://askew.blogharbor.com

Answer 7

3 all the way

Answer 8

Leave, and go to Dafur and Sudan and help the people who really need and WANT the help

Answer 9

I would support Mac as the answer isn't black or white.

Answer 10

4. Winning is no longer an option, but if you want to bang your head against that rock, feel free...