do bush supporters actually think more troops will secure the country and iraq will be peaceful?

Question

in less than 20 years?......im serious, you gotta be high to buy into that. over the past four years it's only gotten worse, and there doesnt seem to be a shortage of IED's or suicide bombers....

insulting me only proves im right.

Answer 1

Some people who support the surge believe that the odds may be against it, but that it's worth trying anyways, but we have to withdraw if it doesn't work.

Others say that it may not work, but it serves a primary goal of intimidating Iran psychologically, because they fund the insurgency, and believed that we would withdraw instead of sending more.

Others say we need even more troops.

And then some of them think it will be enough to secure Iraq.

Answer 2

There will never be a shortage of IEDs or suicide bombers. What we can do is deprive them of is a place to hide. That is what the extra troops are for. They will be placed with Iraqi units as advisers. After we clean out an area, the advisers and their Iraqi counterparts will hold the area so the bad guys don't come back. Up to now, this hasn't been happening. They go in and blow the crap out the insurgents and then leave. That allowed the insurgents to move right back in. Now, they won't be able to do that anymore. If the plan works, eventually the insurgents won't have anyplace to go in Baghdad. Once they're relegated to the countryside, the insurgency loses quite a bit of steam since they won't have all the juicy video for the media. The only way to truly secure the country is for the Iraqis to do it. If there are no sympathizers left, the insurgency will die.

why do insults prove you right? It only proves whoever said it lacked anything relevant to add.

Answer 3

I am not actually a Bush Supporter BUT, I believe it is about time he sent more troops, there were not enough.
We cannot back out on the Iraqi people, and Iran and Syria, Pakistan and others are coming in that is why it APPEARS there is no shortage of IED's or suicide bombers. Chances are that most are from other ME countries. They do not want USA to accomplish the goal, because then Iraq will have as much power as Iran, etc...
We have an OBLIGATION morally to those people now. It is our Job to stay until they either ask us to leave, or there is just no hope left. We started it by ridding the country of tyrannical rule. Often when tyranny stops, chaos develops. It is OBVIOUS that others are coming in to the country. I for one have believed it for years now. I think Bush is right , but not just Syrians,Iranians,and pakistanis....can you tell an egyptian, saudi, iraqi, Indian apart ?? I believe the sneaky Saudis are in on it also. Palestinians, etc.

Answer 4

The US has the capability to win any war once it's mind is made up to do so. We won WWII once we decided to get down and dirty, just like the enemy we were fighting. When we carpet bombed Dresden and sacked Nagasaki and Hiroshima with A-bombs we were down and dirty, we were also winners.

Today, I see parallels with those moves sixty one years ago. We are fighting a hidden enemy who is killing our young men and women, it's time we exposed this evil Islamic slime, and did the dirty to him. In this case we should start by placing a few designer nukes right down the chimney of his own nuclear complex. His IED's and suicide bombers would suddenly be all but useless against this tactic.

We have the resources to use whatever weapons we choose to take out of inventory. I see our troops as the least desirable to use against an enemy who has developed certain tactics that put our guys at a disadvantage. It's time we led the fight and quit being the followers. Let them wonder what our next move will be, instead of us letting them lead us around like lemmings.

Make no mistake who the real enemy is, it is Iran and Syria. Once we open our minds to that fact and those dumb @ss politicians start showing the courage to admit and discuss that fact, the sooner we will end all this. We can't win a war when we keep whining about civil war and Sadr, but we can start winning if we kill the son of a b itch. So what if we make a martyr out of the fat *****, these people have more martyrs than they can count.

See that, I didn't insult you, not even once!

Answer 5

Bush supporters are like the president "hawks" the only solution to a problem is use of force, they have placed themselves in a position that makes it almost unthinkable not to win in Iraq, first they told you Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, then when it was found out that was a lie it became well we had to go in and get rid of a tyrant so that made it alright to invade Iraq, then when we found out that we would not be welcomed as they thought it was because we did not have enough troops to secure the country not because the Iraq people might not like occupation any more than we would and would use any means to end it, so now it comes down to the fact the supporters of the president in this effort have not made America safer in fact they have succeeded in making it more dangerous. Iraq will not be secure and at peace within the next fifty years much less the next twenty

Answer 6

Do you think leaving now would have the same result?

I don't recall anyone saying the country would break out in to peace with more troops.

the point of the increased troop levels was to help contain the problem areas until the Iraqi government could do the jobs them self's.

when a river is rising you stack the sand bags up till the water recedes, not take them down.

and despite what the media and sites like moveon.org say the levels of violence are contained to a few areas and a majority of the country support the US particularly in Kurd Held territories.

Answer 7

This surge might have helped in 2003, but its really too late for significant impact on secretarian violence. This is why so many top commanders are so skeptical of this plan. They missed just absolutely crucial window of opportunity to set some order in Iraq.

Instead when we toppled Saddam, the US & allies disbanded existing Iraqi army which basically have put thousands of armed/trained angry men on streets of Iraq without jobs. And refused to recognize insurgency. Hate to point fingers, but Rumsfeld really didn't do his job as he should have.

We should have kept Saddam's army even though they were once controlled by Saddam, but they did agree to corporate. This would have at least saved trouble training whole new army. And help to control violence. But this is one of many many many many errors the US made.

People say we're doing noble thing and they're right, but one would be frustrated if someone goes out to collect money for poor and this person first buys Bently, some diamond jewery, drive to homeless shelter and ask for donations. This is what we're doing. We got noble goal and have good intentions, but absolutely massed up on actual process of doing it. My finger points to top officials and policy makers who were so arrogant that they were bold enough to essentially ignore common sense and reality on the ground while soldiers took hit after hit paying for mistakes those idiots at DC made.

Answer 8

evaluate this. heavily, take a 2nd and think of roughly this: the yank defense force soundly defeated the communists in Viet Nam in each substantial conflict fought - including the TET offensive which accurately overwhelmed them. For all motive and purpose, the North Viet Namese have been defeated - yet they checked in with the yank media and, to their utter amazement, they found out that they have got been triumphing. And, authentic adequate, we lost the conflict at homestead and withdrew our troops - assuring the Viet Cong a victory and the resultant bloodbath. Do you relatively think of this little bit of history is lost on the terrorists? for this reason i've got self assurance that public reflects and rallies geared in direction of our president in a time of conflict is comparable to helping our enemy. it is relatively not that frustrating to connect the dots.

Answer 9

ok, so if insulting you only proves you're right... why are you so pissy GWB is trying to do his job? Do you want the US to leave?

You know what, you're right. Let's pull all US forces out of every country in the world and bring them home.

Because isolationism worked the last time the US tried it.

Answer 10

I believe the Bush supporters believing President Bush do right job. I'm just asking myself, by 140.000 soldiers right now in Iraq the situation is so bad and what when they sending more than 20.000 soldiers there right now, what's is in the few weeks, all this trouble there just stopping right a way??? They having no more attacks, no soldiers get attacked, any civilians get killed??? I don't thinks so. Who is believing that???