Do you think the US military needs to be in Iraq?

Answer 1

At the beginning of this turmoil I felt that it was a good thing that our troops were in Iraq. But now I feel that it's a no win situation and the longer we are in Iraq the more troops we are going to lose. The Middle East has been fighting amongst each other for eons and they will continue this conflict for many yrs to come.Until someone gets their head out of their butt and negoiates in the right sense.I don't know whom is dumber..the Iraqies or Saudi Arabia or Afganistan or US for going over there in the first place.Now i hear that they want to bomb Iran..Good Grief...will this ever stop? I just don't understand why people can't get along in the first place.These terrorists will keep coming no matter what the US does. You kill one and two more pop up, it's non stop with these characters.We finally capture Sadaam but Bin ladin is still running around some where out there and no one knows where he is at.The US is spending billions on this war/conflict and it doesn't look like it's going to stop anytime soon.I say bring our troops home ASAP since we aren't making any headway with these countries.

Answer 2

I would agree with anyone who says that Iraq did not pose a direct threat to the United States prior to the war. That does not hold true anymore. We must complete the mission both for our own credibility and the stability of Iraq. We destabilized their government. In effect, we broke it, now we must fix it. To those who say there were no terrorists in Iraq prior to the war again I would say you are probably correct, but there are terrorists in Iraq now. Engaging these terrorists in the Middle East is keeping Americans safe by extension. This is due to the fact that terrorists resources and manpower are tied up fighting us in Iraq and therefore are not able to concentrate on attacking us here at home. If we do not complete this mission it will not bode well for us in the future. The most important reason is because the terrorists will view it as a loss for America and this will embolden them. Further, the rest of the world will view it not only as a loss, but would also seriously question our resolve and will to stand by our allies. This would negatively effect our ability to properly conduct foreign policy for decades to come. Lastly, if we pull out now we will have to fight in the region again and next time the difficulties will be magnified dramatically. People need to understand that not completing this mission is exactly what enemies would like to see happen. There are many people in the world who would like to see America humbled in the eyes of the world by any means. These same people will not like it if we successfully complete the mission, but they will be forced to respect our abilities and this is very important in world relations. We do not have to be liked, we do not have to be feared, but if we are not respected, even grudgingly, we are indeed doomed.

Answer 3

regardless of how we think about going there in the first place, we owe it to our military and more to the Iraqi people to stay and work this out to the end. As long as you have people strapping bombs on and blowing up innocent people because of hatred, the job is not done. Until Iraq can stand up for themselves and protect their own interest, we must stay to assist them.

Answer 4

I believe the US does need to be in Iraq, but they also need to be withdrawing troops. How are the Iraqis supposed to be learning how to govern themselves with thousands and thousands of US troops there doing everything for them. We need to be taking troops out of Iraq slowly but steadily.

Answer 5

In my opinion NO, but our government chose to send our military to fight a battle, so I feel it's my place to support our military. If the government had to go fight a battle every time they disagreed with another country's political views.........and their lives were endangered...........maybe......just maybe.......they might try a little harder to work things out before it got this far. And we'll never know the real reason for war.......because our government will never tell the truth. We'll lose life after life because little boys in suits want to send others out to fight their battles.

Answer 6

there will always be war and conflict. We as a nation elected Bush, supported him after 9/11. We were all gung ho about going after terrorists. Now when the feelings have faded, we abandon him, abandon our troops, abandon our country. Frankly, I think anyone who asks a question like this, or answers it No doesn't matter.

Answer 7

No, Nein, Nada, En O, know,= No

The means to real peace. No government admits any more that
it keeps an army to satisfy occasionally the desire for conquest.
Rather the army is supposed to serve for defense, and one invokes the
morality that approves of self-defense. But this implies one's own
morality and the neighbor's immorality; for the neighbor must be
thought of as eager to attack and conquer if our state must think of
means of self-defense. Moreover, the reasons we give for requiring
an army imply that our neighbor, who denies the desire for conquest
just as much as does our own state, and who, for his part, also keeps
an army only for reasons of self-defense, is a hypocrite and a
cunning criminal who would like nothing better than to overpower a
harmless and awkward victim without any fight. Thus all states are
now ranged against each other: they presuppose their neighbor's bad
disposition and their own good disposition. This presupposition,
however, is inhumane, as bad as war and worse. At bottom, indeed, it
is itself the challenge and the cause of wars, because, as I have
said, it attributes immorality to the neighbor and thus provokes a
hostile disposition and act. We must abjure the doctrine of the army
as a means of self-defense just as completely as the desire for
conquests.

And perhaps the great day will come when people,
distinguished by wars and victories and by the highest development of
a military order and intelligence, and accustomed to make the
heaviest sacrifices for these things, will exclaim of its own free
will, "We break the sword," and will smash its entire military
establishment down to its lowest foundations. Rendering oneself
unarmed when one had been the best-armed, out of a height of feeling
-- that is the means to real peace, which must always rest on a peace
of mind; whereas the so-called armed peace, as it now exists in all
countries, is the absence of peace of mind. One trusts neither
oneself nor one's neighbor and, half from hatred, half from fear,
does not lay down arms. Rather perish than hate and fear, and twice
rather perish than make oneself hated and feared -- this must someday
become the highest maxim for every single commonwealth.

Our liberal representatives, as is well known, lack the time
for reflecting on the nature of man: else they would know that they
work in vain when they work for a "gradual decrease of the military
burden." Rather, only when this kind of need has become greatest
will the kind of god be nearest who alone can help here. The tree of
war-glory can only be destroyed all at once, by a stroke of
lightning: but lightning, as indeed you know, comes from a cloud --
and from up high.

(translation by W. Kaufmann, transcribed by T. Rourke. File archived
at Lord Etrigan's Nietzsche site...
http://members.aol.com/lrdetrigan/index4.html Accept no imitations!)

Answer 8

Yes, we need to be killing Radical Muslim Extremist where ever the opportunity presents itself.
Right now Iraq is drawing these scumbags in like moths to a candle.
It is like setting a rat trap.

Answer 9

For a short time. The country need stabilization so it's own
government can function. So the answer is (drum roll please)

YES.

MERRY CHRISTMAS and have a nice day.

Thank you very much, while you're up!!!

Answer 10

No .. it is not good for iraq,US and also for the world peace