2007-01-16 13:08:57 · 16 answers · asked by Ree 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
The term "throwing good money after bad" keeps going through my head. Except instead of just money, it's our young men and women.
2007-01-16 13:12:20 · answer #1 · answered by trentrockport 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
With all due respect and sincerity, our President is trying to insure not only our future, but the future of our children and grandchildren is free from terror attacks.
If we pull the troops at this point in time, the enemy will have the advantage, and we'll be attacked again in no time.
I'm also wondering if or not you realize al Queada still has cells in the U.S., those who are still walking among us as though nothing has happened, just waiting for one phone call. Which is why they are fighting to keep that patroit act going.
It is my sincere belief that if people have nothing to hide, they will not protest. If they protest against having government listen in for awhile, then they have something they don't want authorities to know. They could be cheating on their wives or husbands, and government doesn't care. They are seeking out all ties to al Queada.
I don't have anything to hide and I want these people flushed out, therefore if the Federal Gov. wants to trace my calls, they are more than welcome to.
If our men leave Iraq at this stage of the game, and the newly elected officials in Iraq do not have enough chance to secure their government, not to mention get talks going between the Suenes and Sheites, there is no doubt that they will not only be fighting their own civil, religious war, but the rest of al Queada will move in and overthrow the new government. They need to have their own security forces built, then we can begin withdrawal.
Let me ask you this. If our country had another civil war, and there were other country's across the ocean willing to come in and help us secure our areas and get peace negoations started, would you not welcome the help so we would have a chance to form a democracy? Or would you want our government overthrown by our own terrorist?
These are things that we have to consider. I have family over there as well, and they believe what the President is doing is right; however, they do feel the forces should have been sent in sooner, they'll take any help they can get.
A temporary augmentation of troops will help secure the areas and get Iraqs security and armies in place. Otherwise, they won't stand a chance. Wouldn't you love every country who is being tormented by their own population free of their problems and be able to live in peace? And don't you think that other Iraq people who are here on visas would like to go home to visit with family or to move back home?
2007-01-16 21:33:11 · answer #2 · answered by chole_24 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Have you noticed that when someone lost a lot of money in a casino, he would not want to give up but keep on betting until all the money is gone even though deep in his heart he knows his chances of winning back the losses are slim. However the hope of winning back is the only hope he has. I think this is what Bush is thinking when he sends more troops with a surge.
2007-01-16 21:17:06 · answer #3 · answered by longliveabcdefg 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
its called a plan to succeed.
its the same kind of increase in troops that charlie wrangle and the other Dem's where all for when they thought that bush might be against it.
democrats must now redouble their efforts. is they dint stop this or at least underfund it, we could easily win.
keep trying, this might be your last chance to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
2007-01-16 21:25:18 · answer #4 · answered by karl k 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This should be the last hurrah. I think we should grant him the troops; and if he cannot secure Baghdad after this additional surge in troops, then we should get out for good. Why are we trying to help a people who dont want to help themselves?
2007-01-16 21:22:53 · answer #5 · answered by whylekyotee2003 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Megalomania
2007-01-16 22:51:10 · answer #6 · answered by Avalon 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that we should have left Saddam in there. Because its going to take someone just like him to run that Country. That is all they know is fighting and wars. Bush was so stupid for going into Iraq anyway.
2007-01-16 21:19:05 · answer #7 · answered by B 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
He does not want to admit defeat. He himself said that the only reason why the war has still not been won is because not enough manpower was sent over there to begin with.
2007-01-16 22:01:12 · answer #8 · answered by Alletery 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It's reinforcing failure. The worst military decision you can make.
It's why he had to get some new generals who would agree to it.
2007-01-17 02:02:02 · answer #9 · answered by brainstorm 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
To help hold the areas the military's clear!
2007-01-16 21:13:55 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋