Was the invasion a wrong or he still will control the situation with the time?
2007-01-06 22:17:49 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
It wasn't an invasion, it isn't a war, it's a liberation. That's not fighting we are seeing, it's celebrating. I don't know where you live, I live in the U.S.A. and if another country tried to liberate me, I would be in the streets celebrating just like those folks are doing.
2007-01-06 22:43:06 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because he's just a puppet and it's not in his interest.
Why would the Iraqi people listen to America? Or an iraqi government put together by America...
Think about it, Bush is about to send more troops into Iraq right now. Is that the way to "put order" to a country?
Imagine your family have been fighting with another family over a piece of property for 20 years, then all of a sudden a third prick comes out of nowhere and grab the property from both of you. First of all it wouldn't solve the initial problem. Second of all you wouldn' t be too happy about that third prick.
Now Bush is not trying to share the property between those families. He just wants his own share. So how can the Iraqi people be happy about it?
2007-01-07 06:29:29 · answer #2 · answered by Hansinchina 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The government was allowed to be set up to fast.We should have set up an interim government with a general as the overseer and sent enough troops to completely eliminate resistance no matter who it was.As it is now the Iraqis have a government they voted for and we would have to start over from scratch to fix it.Sadr is the major trouble maker but has support of many people and influence in the new government as long as this is the case there will be trouble.If we do anything to Sadr we will basically be declaring war on the new government.
2007-01-07 06:30:23 · answer #3 · answered by Tommy G. 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
How can anyone know for sure. They are trying to install a new form of government in a nation that has only know the rule of a tyrant. A nation that didn't ask or fight for its freedom. I think that is the major difference of why some countries can successful install a new form of government and some can not. Plus you have the issues of the war between the Shiite and Sunni, which is kind of a "small" civil war. Will is work, only a fool will say yes or no.
2007-01-07 06:26:42 · answer #4 · answered by Brad25 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I believe that invasion is was wrong and big mistake and it lead to death of thouthand American soldierd and tenth thouthand of innocent people Iraq,and civil war has began up there.
2007-01-07 06:24:44 · answer #5 · answered by hanyyousri 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bush cannot achieve order because it was the wrong war at the wrong time, wrong place, wrong man.
2007-01-07 06:24:13 · answer #6 · answered by jy9900 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Our President did not act alone on this, our Congress had to vote on this issue.
It was a team effort... good or bad ... it is what happened but NOT by President Bush alone.. He just happens to be the one in the forefront that has to announce everything to the world.
Understand & Have A Great Day
http://360.yahoo.com/sewwoodyou
2007-01-07 06:22:34 · answer #7 · answered by H.O.T. Dog 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
quixotic: 1. (noun) Possessing or acting with the desire to do noble and romantic deeds, without thought of realism and practicality.
that's positive spin. I'm not going to go negative. He's our president.
2007-01-07 06:23:37 · answer #8 · answered by The Instigator 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I guess order will be restored but not soon.
2007-01-07 06:25:45 · answer #9 · answered by Muhammad Ali 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
because he's only born with one testicle and a shortened sausage
2007-01-07 06:19:13 · answer #10 · answered by Joy T 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋