English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-01-09 16:33:47 · 19 answers · asked by Jessica P 2 in Politics & Government Military

I said 30,000 because that is the original #. Bush at the current moment is calling back in 20,000. My cousin being one! This will be the second time he goes. The first time was for a year and a half. They are trying to pull more from our firefighter and police officer experienced Marines. Which my cousin was a firefighter and when he got back from Iraq he joined the police force.

2007-01-09 16:43:07 · update #1

Okay and to add alittle bit more a a question WHY DO YOU THINK ITS A GOOD/BAD IDEA?

2007-01-09 16:45:17 · update #2

19 answers

I just read a very good article from the Military Star here by Oliver North. He has some very valid and true points to think about.

"Not one of the soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Guardsmen, or Marines I interviewed told me that they wanted more U.S. boots on the ground. In fact, nearly all expressed just the opposite: "We don't need more American troops, we need more Iraqi troops," was a commom refrain. They are right."

"Adding 10,000 or 20,000 more U.S. troops--mostly soldiers and marines--isn't going to improve Iraqi willingness to fight their own fight--an imperative if we are to claim victory in this war. While putting 200,000 American or NATO troops on the Iranianand Syrian borders to stop infiltration might make sense, that's "mission impossible" given the size of U.S. and allied armed forces."

"In Ramadi, long a hotbed of Sunni terrorism, new National and Provincial police forces are increasingly effective. Calling themselves "The Sons of Al Anbar," thousands of young Iraqi males have volunteered to defend their cities, villages, homes, and families from terrorists."

"A "Surge" or "targeted increase in U.S. troop strength" or whatever the politicians want to call dispatching more combat troops to Iraq isn't the answer. Adding more trainers and helping the Iraqis to help themselves, is. Sending more troops is simply sending more targets."

GOOD FOR OLIVER NORTH!! I think "HE" SHOULD BE PRESIDENT!!!!!!!

2007-01-09 18:07:52 · answer #1 · answered by Nancy D 7 · 0 0

This is simply unnecessary. So much lives have been wasted there already and perhaps, after more than two years, there is still no concrete outcome of the objectives set forth. This one simply fails the old adage 'The end justifies the means', because clearly, the US military is on the losing end - both human and machinery.

2007-01-10 00:44:11 · answer #2 · answered by Spaceman Spiff 3 · 0 0

I think it's about time we got more troops in there. Now the decision needs to be made to let them act like soldiers and not peace keepers. Let them kick a whole lot of *** and take no names and not worry about civillian casualties. I don't want innocent people to die but I don't want anymore U.S. soldiers to die either. We have lost enough troops in Iraq and we have had more wounded than most people can fathom. Let us beat them down and then come home!

2007-01-10 00:42:45 · answer #3 · answered by freakyallweeky 5 · 1 1

Bush wants to send 30,000 more troops to Iraq so that he can march them into another death trap in Iran when the time comes.

-That time being when his Zio-con Jew Traitor PNAC bosses tell him it's time.

2007-01-10 01:34:34 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I think they should put more in there so the security is tighter... i just wish it wasent my guy going there... but he wants to and i have to stand by his decision cause i want to be suporitive... grrr damn war... but yeah i think there should be mroe so there are more guys look for each othes back

2007-01-10 00:48:48 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

How about we send them after osama. We need to send our troops after the people that attacked us and not just after the people bush doesn't like.

2007-01-10 00:43:01 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

I think if our generals and our president are saying it is needed we probably do. They have alot more experience then I do. It is easy to coach from the couch, it is entirely another matter to truly know what your talking about.

2007-01-10 00:38:40 · answer #7 · answered by bunnydlh 3 · 2 1

I don't think that we can let our guard down at this particular place in time. We must not let those that have died for this liberation, have done so in vain.

2007-01-10 00:43:53 · answer #8 · answered by btc1444 2 · 1 0

Well i think the president and his advisor's and congress knows more about it than anybody, thats why we elected them. and im in the army and i have no complaints

2007-01-10 00:40:46 · answer #9 · answered by junior85323 2 · 1 0

I think Bush and his Administration should go and fight in Iraq. Then I would support him- until then **** him.

2007-01-10 00:38:37 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers