Sadly, war is necessary in this violent world in order to have lasting peace. This war has been especially tough because we let things get so out of hand and ignored the many attacks of the 80's and 90's. We let them build up and now we're paying for it. Either we win this war or we run away from it and pay even worse consequences in the future. We can be cowards and let our children pay the price if that's what we want.
But in answer to your question, I have no doubt that if the president were a democrat we would pull out of Iraq immediately and then we could watch as Iran and Syria move the missing WMD's back in and continue with their nuclear bomb program. Then the terrorist camps would start back up, and we can expect to be hit again once they ramp up to speed. This time it will be millions who will die instead of a few thousand.
We never learn. This is exactly what happened when Hitler tried to take over the world. Now it's the Islamofascists who want us all to die or be enslaved. Take your pick. Either we stand strong and fight or we give in and be oppressed for generations to come.
2007-01-12 03:44:11
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Totally depends on the person. After all, some Republicans have called for an immediate withdrawal...and some Democrats want to stay in Iraq.
2007-01-12 01:15:40
·
answer #2
·
answered by Dilettante 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
We're in the situation now that ... we're damned if we do and we're damned if we don't. If we stay in Iraq, our soldiers will continue to die. If we pull out, we'll be villified even more than we are right now.
If this war was really for the betterment of the Iraqi people, why are they off-ing each other and our military in record numbers? Every other country leader in the enitre world was able to see that this war was not a good idea, I don't understand why ours' couldn't. We wouldn't be in the situation we're in now if we hadn't started this war to begin with. And the entire endorsement for the reason we should go to war has been proven false. We told Saddam to give up his WMD or we'd invade and he didn't ... turns out, he didn't have them to begin with! But everyone forgets about that.
Here's a little bit of information for you -- When Saddam was in control, Iraq and Iran were always at each other's throats; neither country was terrible interested in attacking us. Now, it doesn't matter because whoever gains power of Iraq will probably join forces with Iran ... and they both hate us. We've upset the entire balance of the already unstable Middle East. And that's supposed to make our country safer? I think not.
2007-01-12 01:21:08
·
answer #3
·
answered by ♦Hollywood's Finest♦ 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
In my opinion very little would change. The world changes when someone is elected President. It's easy to arm chair quarterback something but when faced with the decisions that affect real people it's not so easy. Look at Vietnam, JFK and LBJ were both Democrats, is the difference so great between them and GWB? All three had access to intelligence we will never know and all moved forward against popular opinion. Things are always easier when someone else has the responsibility.
2007-01-12 01:14:43
·
answer #4
·
answered by Chuck J 5
·
3⤊
0⤋
We'd pull our troops out sooner, but not immediately. The presidency is something that transcends party politics and ideology to a certain extent. Once you are prez, you no longer deal in theory (which you can do a lot when you are just a legislator), you are responsible for people's lives. So you get in the Oval Office and it occurs to you that you can't just pull everyone out tomorrow - there is too much at stake. But a Dem would most likely pull our troops out sooner, regardless of whether we win or not.
2007-01-12 01:18:46
·
answer #5
·
answered by gaskems 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
i would move to Canada....till 8 tears from now when people get tired with the left wing and republicans take back over....its a cycle...no party is perfect and no party makes everyone from there own party happy....the democrats where in control before the republicans took over....and the reason the rep took over was because the democrats where not making the majority of the people happy so they need a change.....and they same has happened this year ....and in 8 to 12 years it will completely flop again.....no party makes everyone happy it just hold us over for a while......we are doomed in the end
2007-01-12 01:18:03
·
answer #6
·
answered by stewart2000gt 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
He or she will redeploy the troops back. Why we have to borrow 3-5 trillion dollar for this ugly war.He or she doesn't care if any Nation calls America a looser because, 5 years is going no where why we put our head to the sand and let our people and Iraq people die for what? oil that we depend on foreign countries. Sad and now my family has to work harder to prepare our children for paying back our National debt. Have you hear about National debt? trillion and trillion dollars. Tell me how are we going to pay for it? ( By the way opinion is cheap but, when the commitment to pay National debt is expensive. )
2007-01-16 00:48:59
·
answer #7
·
answered by ryladie99 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
He could not call for an immediate withdrawal, unless he was a complete idiot.
If we pulled out immediately, the U.S would be blamed for leaving an infant democracy to fend for themselves.
What we need to do is get the Iraqis ready to govern and protect and then slowly withdraw.
2007-01-12 01:16:59
·
answer #8
·
answered by GaelicMel 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
Bush declared we won when he was on some dinging. at that point he should have sent in enough troops to act as police. The new way of high tec fighting calls for a small army with ultra modern weapons - once the war is won - conventional large army to police an area is required. I guess we all learned that. I suggest we pull 30,000 troops out of South Korea they don't want us and why should we be there first line of defense when N Korea cascades over the border with a million man army.
PS: what gets me why we never showed be-headings to our liberal citizens or perhaps we should show Americans committing suicide jumping out of the twin towers.
2007-01-12 01:16:22
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
War is a bad idea. Quitting the one we are in immediately is also a bad idea. I think a Democratic president would do what they thought was best to stabilize the situation and get it over with, and would not be so quick to start another war.
Hopefully the Republicans are already doing the exact same thing.
2007-01-12 01:11:30
·
answer #10
·
answered by joecool123_us 5
·
1⤊
3⤋