.. then why are we "arming" and "training" iraqis and playing around with a puppet govt? wouldnt disarming them and rounding up dissidents make more sense? or maybe we need help from iraqis to fyt iraqis and run the place? oh wait, we are trying to let them run themselves so we can leave .. but we are at war with iraq ..im just alittle confused ...
2006-12-15 15:06:00 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Its called staying the course.
2006-12-15 15:09:25 · answer #1 · answered by dstr 6 · 1⤊ 4⤋
Line up because winning is losing and losing is winning in this Iraq War. The United States started the war and deserves to lose the war for that one single reason. There are other almost countless reasons we are losing this war which means we are winning this war in reality because it is a very bad idea aside from being a terrible mistake.
The old "Win at any cost folks" are back at it again. The rational is like this, "We are America, so we have a right to win because god loves us the most." He would not have made America the most wonderful Country in the history of the world unless he loved us the most. So, If we invaded Iraq, then God will see to it that Iraq loses this War.
You see, this kind of reasoning goes round and round. It makes no sense, but they are sticking with it no matter what. And the supporters will never accept defeat because they will never understand why it was such a bad idea.
So, when we lose, like in Vietnam, we have a chance to learn something, but if we don't learn something, we get to do it again and again.
So, we win if we lose and understand that the invasion of Iraq was a bad idea, a very bad idea!
2006-12-15 23:28:54 · answer #2 · answered by zclifton2 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
America is walking a seriously razor-thin tightrope when it comes to Iraq, and we're slicing up our feet.
See, contrary to what that guy said before, we ARE at war in Iraq. But, he was right by a very little bit. We're not exactly at war WITH Iraq. See, we support their right to a sovreign, democratically-elected government... so long as that government supports us and isn't about to kick us out. The "republican party" here in the US needs to have the constant "homeland security" issue to fall back on, telling the voters that if the "democratic party" were in power, the terrorists would be blowing us up.
Really, this is all a political game, and it's a durn shame because it's costing lives. But the idea of a "War on Terror" should scare us all. It's a very Orwellian concept. That war will never be over, we can't extricate ourselves from it, and right now, we don't even have the option of blowing something up and ending it as we unfortunately did in Nagasaki. Now, we're sending our troops to fight an idea. Hrmph. Good luck, troops. I'm sorry we couldn't send you guys out with a little more moral high ground.
2006-12-15 23:27:44 · answer #3 · answered by Gwenhwyvar 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
We aren't at war with Iraq and never were, we sent out troops in there to topple Saddam Hussien and his government -- it was a Coup D'etat done by the US Armed Forces. After that was done, it became an occupation.
Rounding up "dissidents" would be kind of hard because 90% of the Iraqis want us out of their country.
It's no wonder you're confused, it's a big mess.
2006-12-15 23:29:49 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
It would be nice if it would be so easy as disarming them... but in order to keep them disarmed we have to keep the weapons from coming in as well, not to mention find all the weapons stockpiles.
Personally I would never let a government disarm me. Especially not if i knew there were terrorists running around my country and sectarian violence all around...
I think its highly possible that people just take up arms for the sheer sake of protecting their families and maybe they get all sectarian and crazy from dealing with all the things going on around them and perhaps their deeply rooted religious beliefs...
if I lived there i would want to have a gun in my home for when some kind of death squad came to knock down my door....
Haha helping them fight hasn't turned out so well... all that sectarian-ness and whatnot...
I'm confused too and at a total loss as far as a solution to all of this.
Maybe we'll know a good one when we see one.
2006-12-15 23:17:03 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Iraqis are fighting Iraqis and we are in the middle of it.
"The fighting in Iraq involves dozens of militias and gangs. Among the major combatants: Al-Qaeda in Iraq..., Badr Brigade..., Mahdi Army..., Mujahedin Shura Council..., Peshmerga..." USA Today, November 30, 2006
2006-12-15 23:16:34 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
NO
America is at war with it's own middle class
The war is just a tool to destroy the prosperous hard working of America. So the frugal system with Fiefdoms can take over.
Go big Red Go
2006-12-15 23:14:38 · answer #7 · answered by 43 3 · 5⤊ 1⤋
It's called an "occupation."
2006-12-15 23:08:21 · answer #8 · answered by HawkEye 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
We were at war with Iraq at first, that mission has been accomplished.. But then, them pesky terrorists came across the border and started fighting us. So the war changed to the "global war on terrorism".. Does that help at all??
2006-12-15 23:09:25 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 7⤋
2 maybe 3 well placed atomic fission devices would certainly put a stop to it.
2006-12-15 23:13:12 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 5⤋