On tv there have been many news cast about putting more troops in Iraq. I think this is a bad thing to do. What do you think do we need more troops in Iraq?
2007-01-04 10:50:04 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
A gradual pull-back will be the worst option - it can put the remaining forces to much greater danger. Luckily it seems it's not to be adopted.
Then the left-over is stay flat, more troops or total withdrawl. Bush will never admit his failure and request a total withdrawl, soldiers in Iraq won't because they don't want to sacrifice for nothing (a noble but unwise reason). Stay-flat won't resolve the increasing insurgency issue.
Therefore, a temp increase in troops is the most rational solution, although not favored. The important thing is to set a firm timeline and stick to it. After 3-6 months if peace are not in place, IA are not ready, then we should just all leave..... Well, Bush won't make this kind of promise either.
2007-01-04 12:10:23 · answer #1 · answered by Spring Snow 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No we don't need more troops in Iraq,sending more troops.Won't solve a freakin thing over there. Saddam is burning in hell,along with his sons. What they need to do is find out if Bin Laden is dead or alive.
If he's alive which is highly unlikely,they form a plan.To trap him and then kill him,then leave Iraq. America may be the most powerful country on the face of the earth. But we can't solve their problems,they have to learn.To do it themselves as a new government,we can't keep leading them by their hand.
2007-01-05 22:47:07 · answer #2 · answered by Daniel P 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If Bush Jr was more like his Daddy this war would have been done and over in 3 months. 525,000 soldiers and sweep in clean up and get out.
Desert Storm there were 525,000 troops. And, was the most successful war in the history of our country.
2007-01-04 19:35:47 · answer #3 · answered by Kitty 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bush ignored the commanders when they requested more troops before the war started and in the early part. He, being a drunk AWOL Air National Guard no-show, knew better.
So now the chickens have come home to roost. Now, more troops = more targets. Bush should have been a Union general in the Civil War. Inept to a staggering degree.
2007-01-04 18:53:50 · answer #4 · answered by iwasnotanazipolka 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
No, Bush landed a jet on a aircraft carrier and said we won the war. The war is over he said. Why are we sending more troops if we won?
I think we should make a real circle around the terrorists. If it goes into Pakistan or India or wherever make a real circle around the terrorists. Don't use numbers but use intelligence and counter measures. I do not believe the usual ground combat approach works here. I believe that approach just kills more Americans.
2007-01-04 18:58:11 · answer #5 · answered by Ya H 1 · 0⤊ 3⤋
I think we need to finish what we started and that probably means sending more troops
2007-01-04 18:53:13 · answer #6 · answered by Danielle 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
More troops will not do anything. There is no militay solution that will work in Iraq.
2007-01-04 19:02:12 · answer #7 · answered by Zezo Zeze Zadfrack 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well we are putting more troops in iraq in preparation for the attack on iran
2007-01-04 18:53:01 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
well BUSH dodo is getting out of control...so he thinks he needs more troops to wipe his butt clean,
in other words more body bags will come home... more kids will be without parents...more widows....
well as usual DUBBY is worng.
2007-01-05 21:32:27 · answer #9 · answered by rat123pig 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I say any one who believes we need more troops should join in the fight.
:)
2007-01-04 18:58:26 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋