us in in Iraq?
2007-01-10 03:28:20 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
The situation is not winnable as such. There is a giant war occuring in the middle east that is older than us by a lot. Jews against arabs, suffis against sunnis against shiites against kurds, iraq against Iran. It is an Interfamilial squabble thousands of years old. Now the USA wishes to get involved in this and we have no business in it. It is similar to Vietnam and Korea in that none of the indiginous fighters want us there either. The soldiers are hampered by strict limits about what they can do in this war. The end result is that someone is going to nuke us. No not with a global killer like those missles you always see, but with a SADM (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suitcase_bomb)
Now an SADM placed in a tunnel in the NYC subway could do enough damage to level most of downtown manhatten without the overlying fall out that is typified with global killer nukes (the missles). There would be mass panic and it is a pretty hard headline to get across that we just got nuked.
Time was when we and the USSR were the only ones with these. Now Iran has them and Israel and a few other places.
So in the end we will not win and we can not win.
However if we simply leave now and let Iraq do its own thing then we get another Hussein in power or worse have a country thats even more devestated than when we entered and if WWII taught us anything it is that if you leave a country devestated the people there will follow anyone even a Hitler in order to get ahead in the world.
So now we are stuck. Damned if we do and damned if we don't.
2007-01-10 03:49:31 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Once a place is taken it must be held to prevent more insurgents from coming in. The libs don't want to allow enough troops to be sent to make it possible to stop the insurgents from migrating back into Iraq so the answer to your question would be "that depends on how many troops we have to hold an area after it is taken (whether it is US troops or Iraqi troops).
2007-01-10 11:37:02 · answer #2 · answered by joevette 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The only way to maintain control in a military campaign is to take and hold your ground. If you take and leave, someone will always be there to fill the vacuum.
The only realistic way to succeed there would be to double the number of troops on the ground and commit to at least 20 years active presence. If we're not willing to do that, we should just pull out and let whatever happens happen.
2007-01-10 11:37:11 · answer #3 · answered by Bostonian In MO 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
look, bush didn't get us into this mess! you need to go back and look at all the presidents, his father included, and see where they were the ones who got us into this mess. and us being over there is a good thing ra ra retard! how come so many americans can forget about the horrible day of 9/11?! i don't know anyone who died that day but it got to me bc these are my fellow citizens, my neighbors, my friends friends friends. if you can forget about that day and why we are over there in the first place then u r not american and u need to take ur stupid self, revoke ur citizenship from here, and move somewhere else!
2007-01-10 11:38:20 · answer #4 · answered by cupid6980 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
We should re-take them as many times as it takes.
2007-01-10 11:44:35 · answer #5 · answered by SGT. D 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
stop the dems from working agenst ther our own men and help suport them and let us win ther freedom . thear is no excuse for ther actions.unless thair not on our side?
2007-01-10 11:45:41 · answer #6 · answered by TEBOE7 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Duh! It's unwinable, HELLO! But all we're ever gonna hear is the propaganda WE"RE AMERICA! WE"VE GOT THIS!!! It's an ego thing, a power trip.
2007-01-10 11:33:22 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋