He has a new Secretary of Defense, he's heard from the generals, the Iraq Study Group and his listening tour. After all of that will he dismiss them all and send in this "surge" of more troops?
2006-12-31 23:50:13 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Bush will probably pray intensely about what to do, then realize that God wants him to stay the course. Alas, all the generals in the world will not be able to override God. So get your sons ready to die.
2006-12-31 23:57:02 · answer #1 · answered by Nicole B 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I was here when Gates arrived. Here is what SHOULD come out of this new strategy.
First, there needs to be a surge of troops because we have been so focused on when to bring troops home we have reached a status quo that is no longer acceptable in violence. We are going to have to step up our offensive on the Mahdi Militia, Badr Brigade and the insurgents.
Second, our blind support of the Iraqi Government's sanctioning of sectarian violence has to stop. Shia people are attacking and displacing Sunnis at an alarming rate and it's all done with the help of the Iraqi Police (infiltrated with the Mahdi Militia).
Third, all military operations must be tied to a political goal for the people of Iraq. No more of kicking in doors just to get weapons off th street. We have to get bad guys.
Lastly, our Generals MUST be embedded with the Iraqi political leadership so that we are not doubling our efforts in supporting the people. We have done things that the Iraqi government has done and because of beauracracy, neither has gotten down to the people.
This should be what comes out later this month.
2006-12-31 23:59:36 · answer #2 · answered by ? 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
bruce J reported "9/11 became an remoted experience." the place is he from?...for no count if it relatively is earth then he needs to study some history commencing with the Muslim Brotherhood interior the 1920,which has developed into numeerous terrorist communities and characteristic been inflicting assaults for some years now. the human beings who say that GWB created the terrorist would be in for a impolite awakening. if a Dem is elected and wil be shocked that Bush's leaving did no longer clean up this subject. they are going to little question, conintue to place the blame on Bush and lament the clarification the Dem's can no longer restoration it relatively is Bush's fault. "The conflict we are witnessing around the area isn't a conflict of religions, or a conflict of civilizations. it relatively is a conflict between 2 opposites, between 2 eras. it relatively is a conflict between a mentality that belongs to the middle a protracted time and yet another mentality that belongs to the twenty first century. it relatively is a conflict between civilization and backwardness, between the civilized and the primitive, between barbarity and rationality. it relatively is a conflict between freedom and oppression, between democracy and dictatorship. it relatively is a conflict between human rights, on the only hand, and the violation of those rights, on different hand. it relatively is a conflict between people who manage women human beings like beasts, and people who manage them like human beings. What we see on the instant isn't a conflict of civilizations. Civilizations do no longer conflict, yet compete." with the aid of Wafta Sultan
2016-11-25 19:53:35 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why worry? We WON THE DAMN war... we took the tyrants out and gave the country back to the rightful citizens.
There is no way we, as a military power, are going to be able to undo centuries of tribal/religious in-fighting. Today's main objective: keep the peace untill we train the new Iraq army to police it's own territories then get out. We can always give them air support if they ASK for it.
2007-01-01 02:03:57 · answer #4 · answered by Gunny T 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think he will blow off all of the advise. Probably more of the same rhetoric. A new slogan maybe? He must realize by now that most Americans do not agree with what he is or has been doing. There are more and more active duty, Iraq vets coming forward and giving their veiws of how badly it's going.
2007-01-01 00:00:12 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Bush wouldn't listen to anybody when he stormed into Iraq. Now that his approval rating is at an all time low, he's all ears. Saddam is dead, Iraq is in chaos and will continue to be after our troops leave (minus the 3,000 that are now dead). George Bush and his arrogance have painted him into a corner - finally.
2006-12-31 23:56:20 · answer #6 · answered by Debra D 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Maybe move all our troops around the oil fields. Have 30 miles of protective bases near the refineries.
Then declare Oil is not an important factor in the war.
2007-01-01 01:40:35 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Increasing the troop strength was one of the options given to him.I would have to hope that by this time next year , we will have started the draw down of troops in Iraq. It all depends on the strength of the Iraqi troops. We just can't up and leave this mess until there is some kind of hope for that country.
2006-12-31 23:56:24 · answer #8 · answered by meathead 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
More of the same with slightly altered terminology. There is no "winning" or "success" in Iraq. The conflict between the Suni and Shi'tes is nothing a couple or three centuries will not alleviate. And we are going to be there till then.
2006-12-31 23:54:56 · answer #9 · answered by emiliosailez 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
i only got one advice for him
take the excuse to leave Iraq and go find the real problem
find Osama before his term end
2007-01-01 00:13:53 · answer #10 · answered by kimht 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋