Will the Democrats run the war the correct way?

Question

Bush set to announce troop buildup plans By JENNIFER , Associated Press.

WASHINGTON - President Bush will tell the nation Wednesday night he will send more than 20,000 additional American forces to Iraq, acknowledging that it was a mistake earlier not to have more American and Iraqi troops fighting the war.

Seeking support for a retooled strategy to win support for the unpopular illegal war , the president will acknowledge that the rules of engagement were flawed because certain neighborhoods in Baghdad were put off limits by the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, White House counselor Dan Bartlett said. "Military operations sometimes were handcuffed by political interference by the Iraqi leadership," he said.

Bartlett also said the Iraqis had failed to deliver on earlier pledges to commit more of their troops. "They (the Iraqis) are going to have more boots on the ground," he said. Still, The USA military will still lose like they did in Vietnam.

Answer 1

Once again... lies and fabrications to an article, added by the habitual liar named Erudite....

Let's list 'em again...
"unpopular illegal war"
"Still, The USA military will still lose like they did in Vietnam."

Yet another pathetic attempt to try and fool people... you are exposed for the fabricator and liar that you are, erudite... once again

Answer 2

The biggest concern is that the war has not gone the way the current administration had hoped. With the issues with insurgents and the saudi and afghanistan fed rebels still so active in the country, it will not be pretty to salvage some semblence of peace there. Bush is handling it probably the best that could be expected given the current circumstances. If the democrats had their way, we would literally pull every single resource out of the country and turn our backs on them. That may have been viable in the beginning, but now that would be beyond a disaster, it would be criminal.

It would not only be devastating to Iraq, but it would immediately empower Al Qaeda, who already use the fact that we do not see things through as a means to recuit new suicide bombers, to do more acts of terrorism, after all, when we are faced with terrorists, we lose our nerve and run away, so obviously terrorism works. It would also completely erode our position in the world, where our popularity is already teetering on the brink. Contrary to popular belief, we need allies from around the world, both in the war on terrorism and to help sustain our economy. If we pull out of iraq and leave them all to die, we will lose vast amounts of support immediately.

Aside from all that, morally we also need to see this through in order to give those in Iraq who have a new-found freedom a chance to survive. Cutting and running (the democratic platform) will immediately plunge the country into civil war that likely will be worse than anything Saddam had ever done. At least with Saddam you knew if he hated or liked you, with the insurgents, they just do not care and kill everything, because they are terrorists, and that is what terrorists do...anything they can to cause terror, regardless of who it hurts.

In short, it would be a mistake to take the democratic platform at this point in the war. The republicans and congress did not necessarily make all the right decisions in the beginning, even down to starting the war, but you have to look at where we are RIGHT NOW, not where you think we "should have been" 2 or 3 years ago. You cannot look backward to make decisions going forward, but that is what the democrats want us to do.

Answer 3

this is not like the present administration ever permit the Generals do their interest interior the 1st place. customary Shinseki have been given sacked for pointing out the obtrusive fact that it may take a million/2 a million troops to take care of Iraq. we are leaning heavily on private militia contractors precisely simply by fact we under no circumstances had sufficient boots on the floor. you may't run a war from the golf green Zone utilising retarded political appointees the two. Having the likes of Paul Bremer in can charge replaced into actual mindless. i can not even start to think of of all the crap our final SecDef positioned the militia with the aid of with out seething. perhaps if the Republicans permit the militia run the war on Terror instead of having idiots like Feith, Bolton, Wolfowitz, guideline, and such call the photographs, we does not be in this mess. perhaps then the Democrats does not have the Congressional majority they have at the instant as a counter-reaction to mismanagement of the war. Who do you think of made that ensue? the yankee public. who's blaming them? Oh and at the same time as we are on the priority, a DRASTIC improve interior the tip power of the Marines Corps and army could be advantageous on account that we are battling a war after all, with out conscription. we've been at it for 6 years and the White homestead has tried to combat war at the cheap ("Iraq can pay for itself"). As badly run as this war has been so a approaches, i don't blame the yankee public for desiring a metamorphosis - no remember how badly conceived.

Answer 4

Look at it this way. War is war and no matter who is at the wheel, there are going to be issues. Viet Nam was an entirely different issue and a different era. Unless you lived at that time, it's difficult to understand how very much the country hated it. However, the troops were sent by J.F.K., who was also a democrat...but he was shot and killed before the end of his term. Then came Lyndon Johnson, who didn't end it...then came Richard Nixon after the election. He was a republician. After all the demonstrations and protesting (especially with the entertainment industry...like Jane Fonda looking like a traitor over there), Nixion pulled the troops. But it was not Nixon's war...it was JFK's. There are recorded speaches where he's telling Americans..."We've got to go to Viet Nam"...and the rest is history.

Answer 5

so to summarize - the president will BLAME THE IRAQIS FOR AMERICAN FAILURES IN IRAQ.

call me crazy, but when last i checked, the iraqis never asked us to come there in the first place and when polled the majority want us out now.

bush is simply in denial and congress will need to do something drastic to stop him.

i think the best thing congress can do is to let bush run the war his way for the time being and at the same time USE THEIR SUBPOENA POWER AND INVESTIGATE THIS ADMINISTRATION AND EVERYTHING THEY HAVE DONE.

the evidence gathered will then dictate where the next steps are to be taken...

Answer 6

let's hope this war is just over as soon as possible and we can finally bring back our MEN and WOMEN.We really need to start focusing on Osama bin laden because for some reason we just forgot all about him..But he is not in Iraq he's in Pakistan and/or Afghanistan..Unfortunately the areas he's probably in are all outskirt areas riddled with Al Quaeda and other separatists extremists groups...

Answer 7

It's not up to the Dem's. It's up to the American people to stand behind their troops and support the war effort to the end.

Answer 8

Based on...

LBJ's adventures in Vietnam?
Carter's triumphant rescue mission in Iran?
Clinton's excellent Haiti adventure?
Clinton's "Black Hawk Down" adventure?
Clinton's attack on civilian Serb targets, an unprovoked attack on a nation that we had absolutely no national interest in, and did so without UN approval, based on a lie about 1000's of Kosovars in mass graves?
Wesley Clarke's ineptitude that almost precipitated WW3 by his hostile actions towards Russian troops in Kosovo?

Please, we really, really want to know about all the recent liberal Democrat great military minds.

Answer 9

I don't really recall them being a help in any other war, they will probably just create more government funded projects for people to receive free money from.

Answer 10

i agree with you . I'm a republican, but do believe that we should get out of there with the understanding that if we are attacked again we will make the middle east glow