Will 21,000 more troops fix Iraq?

Question

so let's say we bug out, with all of the ground support. Maybe the Democrats are right after all...

Answer 1

no

Answer 2

I don't think that sending more troops is going to "fix" Iraq. When we found Sadam, we should have made him president again; he seemed to be able to somewhat control the place when he was in charge. I know, you say, "what about those people Sadam killed?"., and I answer, we helped to supply Sadam with chemical weapons and the capacity to produce them back in the 80's. The United Nations petitioned the U.S. to sanction Sadam and Iraq when the Kurds were being gassed and Amnesty International smuggled out video to prove it. We chose to ignore it. We also sent supplys and arms and people to train the Taliban when they were engaged in war with Russia. We helped to train the very people we are now calling terrorists. Our government should seriously reexamine it's stance on foreign affairs and who is allowed to make decisions regarding these things, cause lately (and in the recent past), they have been making some stupid, stupid, decisions that affect us all. I hope that whatever they do, it results in as many of our troops as possible returning home alive and whole, and very soon. My very good friend is in Iraq for the second time in 3 years and every day I pray and worry, pray and worry, and hope for my friend and for the people of Iraq. I think it is the peoples job to make their own government however they have to do it, you can't give democracy to people that don't want it. We don't even have a real democracy here so what makes us think it can happen there?

Answer 3

JEL: Just Enough to Lose

That's what many officers call Bush's escalation of troops in Iraq.
The U.S. military may have officially signed off on President Bush's new Iraq plan, but there is still a healthy dose of skepticism about the so-called surge strategy. Many officers have taken to using the acronym "JEL" to characterize the number of troops dedicated to the new effort. It stands for “Just Enough to Lose." "Look, is this a national effort, or more of the same mid-level one?" asked a senior officer who has served in Iraq. "What I heard last night is more of the same. We either needed to go big — and that means 100,000 soldiers to fight, take on the nastiest elements like Moqtada Al Sadr, and police that country alongside Iraqis — or we should have found a way out."

Answer 4

Does Iraq need to be fixed or the Foreign Policy of the USA, or President Bush and his Republicans?

Why would Americans think they can fix the Middle East with more rapists and murderers and suicide troops when their own homeland needs to be fixed?

Wasn't Hurricane Katrina enough to show that the victims of the African Slave Trade remain enslaved?

Why this obsession with Muslim territory and oil?

Bush should consult Chavez and try to concentrate on tidying up the Americas.

Does 21 ring a bell or is it just the Greek 12 backwards since the Cross has failed the Road Map for Middle East control?

Answer 5

As long as the plans are given to each troop describing what they are wanting them to do, then it can help. Sending our troops back home now will only lead to failure. To become successful at anything, including this war, we will make some mistakes and we need to learn from them, adjust, and move forward again. That is what lots of successful people do. The only way that person would fail is if they were to quit, which is what bringing our troops back home would do. We need to train the leaders in the military and show them how to train their military as well to be the best military they can be and that will allow us to free up some of our responsibilities there and help Iraq move forward as well and give us the option of bringing back some of our troops.

Answer 6

No. The solution is not military, I have great respect for the troops, they have done everything they have been asked to do, and have done it well. If we fail in Iraq, it will be because of bad decisions from Washington. Hind sight is 20-20, but when we found Saddam in his rat hole, we should have thrown in a grenade or 2 and went home.

I believe in rule by self determination, not an imposed government. The people of Iraq need to decide what kind of government they want. We can't set one up for them.

Answer 7

I do not believe that 21,000 more troops will fix the problem in Iraq, the troops who are there already are not being authorized to do their job. If anything it will just make the military camps a bigger and easier target to find.

Answer 8

20,000 is about 50,000 short of what is needed to bring this thing to a screeching halt. A big hammer drives the nail home with one shot. We've got the strength, let's use it to get the thing over then we can bring everyone home.

You can't win a war by playing according to the "gentleman's rule" and you can't win the peace by hiding behind the barrel when the parade goes by.

In both cases you have to stand tall and tough and do all that needs doing, other wise you should not be part of the operations at all.

As a country, we either mean what we say, do what we plan and stay till it's over or we need to scurry off with our tails between out legs and join the "song and dance" crowd who want all of the benefits without any of the toil.

Do we want to be known ( world-wide ) as a nation of "nothings" who lack the courage to stand and help where it's needed? It's easy to get that way, all we have to do is take the easy way out, quit and run.

We have a lot of "political folks" who will do anything to get votes for themselves,...Congress is full of them. Listen to them making speeches that they themselves don't believe. It's part of the political game, it's called "fool the foolish public."

Answer 9

No it will not fix a single thing. We need strategy, a real plan. Something like D-Day. We need to win this war with as few casualties as possible, but without a proper plan our troops are just sitting ducks. Lets get a good war plan, or lets get out

Answer 10

Bush is now buried in a hole he dug. The British and the US screw up the middle east many years ago. The British were swindling the mid east by taking out oil and not paying the royalties they had promised. This was UK interests of British petroleum. They were in big trouble so they asked the US for help and this agreement resulted in B/A British American oil and both parties began ripping off the mid east. Any government in the mid east calling for nationalizing of the oil was attacked covertly and many democratically elected leaders were put out of power or killed.

The countries we now have were arbitrarily created and we have now many ethnic groups vying for power.

So no to your question. More meddling won't do a damn bit of good.

Answer 11

No. Nothing will fix Iraq. We're wasting our soldiers lives and Billions of dollars to establish a democracy in the Middle East. That's like embedding conservatives in San Francisco. It's not going to work. Iraqis' don't know how to use democracy. They will revert to what they've known for thousands or years of tradition. How can we change all of that in a few short years?