Is it the right thing to do to send more troops to Iraq?

Question

Was it right to start the war anyway? If not, is "more troops" an acceleration of committment? What is the right right thing to do now? How would history judge this? How are other countries looking at us?

Answer 1

The right thing to do is admit that the war was a mistake and withdraw the troops. Why kill more soldiers in a last ditch effort for Bush to save some face? He knows it was a mistake, he has to know it. What gains have been made? None. And for those who keep saying "We have to stay there til the war is won," Well, how exactly do you define winning at this point? 3000+ soldiers dead, thousands more innocent Iraqi's dead. Absolutely no order or peace to be found in that country. How do we "win" after that? When all our troops are dead, and all the "bad guys" are dead? There is no winning. It was never America's place to go in there and try to instill order. It is time for Bush to admit that he has committed one of the greatest travesty's against his own country, against Iraq and against the world and get the troops home before another one has to die without just cause.

Answer 2

I've never been sure about the timing. It seems the NCA thought there was more urgency to the thing than turns out to be the case. Not a bad strategic idea, but trying to do it on the cheap with the wrong force structure has caused a good deal of grief. Details about troop strength and force structure are difficult for the experts to get right, so I don't see how we dummies can have the temerity to second-guess with our very limited knowledge; for instance, I don't have a clue how many military police NCO's there are in the army, and that's a hot-ticket item when trying to train up the Iraqi forces.

Answer 3

Again, I stand alone as the voice of reason.
Nobody on this forum knows if sending troops is the right thing to do. The only ones that know that are our military leaders on the ground in Iraq. A bunch of 13 year old children safely in front of the computers at home have no clue about what is necessary to fight and win a war.

Invading Iraq and removing Saddam were the right thing to do. Now it is our responsibility to finish the job, no matter how ugly it might get.

Who knows how history will judge us since we don't know the final outcome yet. Let's worry about that when the war is over, not half-way through.

It is irrelevant what other countries think of us. Life is not about being popular, it is about doing the right thing. All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.

Answer 4

Unfortunately, there is no right answer. There are 2 scenarios of which the second one is what we are gearing up for:

1) Immediate withdraw. This would spare a lot of US soldiers from having to risk their lives. It seems like a good solution, but we have to look at the consequences of this action. If we were to withdraw now without resolution and amidst civil unrest, we will risk losing everything we have already fought for. This would mean that all of the casualties would be for nothing. That every soldier who has put him or herself in the line of fire would have done that for nothing. Personally, I don't think that is the right answer.

2) Send more troops. This will put more of our soldiers (loved ones) in harms way and would seem like more spending for an already expensive (and pointless in some's minds) war. However, if this allows us to wrap things up so that we can get our guys out of there, this may be the best possible scenario. Unpopular as it may be, it may help us to in turn, resolve the situation and withdraw our troops.

In the end, this was was not about oil, or terrorism. This was really about W finishing what his father started. The first George (H.W.) Bush failed to remove Saddam. The second Bush wanted to finish the job. Was this war fair? Was it right? That is subject to opinion. For the sake of online blog peace, let's just say that History will be the ultimate judge..... and so far, its not looking good. As for what other countries think, I don't think that matters as much as most people would like it to. If France hates the US for being in this war too long, what do we care? It may be arrogant to say that, but in the end, do they care about what we think when they act or react to situations? We need to stop worrying about what others think and just do what we need to do to get our guys out of there soon.

On a side note, those who are opposed to the war in Iraq, but are for action in Darfur are hypocrites.

Answer 5

If you understood the reason behind the war in Iraq you could see what Bush wants to happen in the middle east .
It is all about the oil regardless of what anyone tells you . Grow up and see the truth . In the next 30 years that region of the world become the most important place on earth for mans survival .no oil no energy no production of goods . The entire world grinds to a halt and people of privilege will want something done about it .
This is why Bush is and America has been involved in the Middle East for so long .We must control the oil reserves and its pricing or face a change that is long over due .

Answer 6

The war should never have been fought, but it was. All the troops in the world are not going to get rid of the "terrorist" problem, because the United States' use of force around the globe is frequently the cause of terrorism to begin with. The War on Terror will have no end so long as the U.S. Government continues to operate as it does currently.

Only time will say what this era will look like historically, though I suspect the Bush Administration will not be regarded kindly by future generations.

Answer 7

Honestly it's hard to tell. bush admitted today that mistakes were made in his administrations dealings with regards to Iraq... but then he went and made another one by sending 20,000 more troops.
I suppose it's not as easy to comment as one would think. On one hand americans are dying in an illegal and criminal war that was decided back in 1997-1998 by the PNAC (Project for the New American Century). On the other hand the damage is done and the country is quite unstable and it would be unfair and downright dangerous for Americans to pull out.. both for American national security and the people of Iraq. (those in Iraq who support the Americans would feel betrayed and most probably would seek vengeance for this betrayal). America has basically created another Islamo-fascist sect of terrorism in Iraq. Like Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, Augusto Pinochet and countless others monsters created by American Neo-Conservatism... Iraq will spawn a new breed of terrorists. It was up to the Iraqis people to fight for their freedom... it always is up to the people.

Answer 8

No, and it will make no difference except in more death and destruction, both of American soldiers and innocent Iraqis. This is a tried and failed strategy. There is nothing new here. We will not "move forward" simply by sending more bodies.

The Iraq war has been proven as one that should have never been started, and was unjustified from the start. The main basis of the war was to remove the "WMD", which had been shown prior to the invasion to longer exist. After six months in the country, it was learned that all WMD had been destroyed wit hen one year after the Gulf War of 1991, and that there was NO active nuclear program in Iraq, which was another false reason given for invasion.

Answer 9

If you believe it is right to make a play for Dominion and plunder in the Middle East, then send more troops and keep it up. If you feel this is one of the most disgraceful acts of foreign policy ever committed by the US, based on violence, torture, lies, death and greed, then stop burying your head in the sand for our temporary comfort and get the hell out of there. What we are doing is worthy of The World Court for High Crimes for Bush and Cheney, if not Impeachment by the wimpy US Congress, and needs to be seen for what it is and stopped. The longer this goes on, the more we make terror a wish fulfilling prophecy and will deserve the consequences for committing genocide in Iraq and giving "the finger" to the Muslim World. This policy is worthy of coming from the Third Reich, not the United States of America, and is a shameful and tragic chapter in our history. History and the world are already judging us so.

Answer 10

I believe that sending more troops will only serve to prolong the inevitable fact that even if we sent in a million troops it would not stop the people over there from fighting each other or targeting American troops. More troops means more money for the weapons industry who would love to see the war expanded because of more profits.........