Do you think 21,000 troops is too much to send to iraq?

Question

president bush with support of governor arnold is trying to send more than 21,000 troops to iraq and i think its way too much

Answer 1

That's 21,000 too many!

Answer 2

21,000 too many? Is 120,000 enough? No to both. What logic is there that can possibly validate the thinking that this can be finished in a satisfactory way with less numbers? Answer: It does not exist.

Only an emotional, non-reasoning person believes we can walk away from this. Right or wrong, we started this and must finish it. The question is this....do we do what it takes to get it over with quickly and efficiently or do we piddlefart around and drag it out? I already see the greedy nomination hungry politicians setting their hair gel and public image, using the lives of our honored dead as fuel to claim their position in the upcoming elections. Maybe I am not a military genius with the mind of Sun Tzu, but it seems to me that we overpopulate Iraq and send chills down the back of the Iranian leadership and do it soon.

Better to quickly rip the stuck bandage off than to pull it off a hair at a time.

Answer 3

Unless you are a general who has all the facts, how can you judge?

I think that since the USA has created a mess in Iraq - not going to get into whether it was the right thing to do in the first place or not - the USA has a moral obligation to leave Iraq in stability.

If more troops are what's needed to round up all the insurgants, then that's what the USA is morally obligated to do. The whole mess is unfortunate, but if the USA pulls out now, then the civil war that would ensure would mean the loss of millions of lives - some innocent, some not.

There's an obligation to finish what the USA started.

Answer 4

I am glad that all you can do is think and not really know for sure what you are writing about.
What ever number of troops that are needed to break the back of the killer's routine and free Iraq is what are needed. We really have no choice. Remember, there were many like you who didn't want to upset the British in the 1700's, stop slavery in the south and get in Hitler's way in the 40's....You love freedom as long as somebody else pays for it, right?

Answer 5

From what I understand the 21k figure was determined based on the assumption that the Iraq's would move their troops in accordance with the plan. If they don't do that it demonstrates an unwillingness to address the issues within their own country. In that case we shouldn't send any more.

Answer 6

When figuring this it has to be divided by 1/4 because that will be the number on duty at any given time. 3 shifts and 1 on leave. So the number is realy small given what they want to do. I was against this from the beginning, because suburban warfare is by far the most dificult type of fighting and I knew the cost would be high. But you couldn't say that a year ago or you were labeled un American.

Answer 7

somebody made a sturdy element... inspect the previous statistics and you gets approximately 2 hundred ineffective (.01%). that's remarkable how vulnerable the liberals and media have made us... 3000 ineffective is an particularly small huge variety while in comparison with previous conflicts. And specific, I lost 2 youthful acquaintances over there... I additionally nonetheless volunteer on the interior reach VA wellbeing facility working with my wounded brothers and sisters. I keep in mind throughout the time of MY chilly conflict deployments while a 6 month cruise replace right into a assure for 4-10 ineffective in injuries... i replace into additionally aboard the united statesKitty Hawk in 1997 while she finished her FIRST dying-loose deployment in her 30 years. I held a newborn as he died on the flight line, examine the message while one among my pupils died while her airplane crashed, and labored the seek for the 50 crewmen who died in a double P-3CIII Orion crash off San Diego. damn liberals, Iran, Syria, and CBS information.

Answer 8

I don't think this number is enough to be effective. We need 50-75,000 trained combat troops, and the loosening of the rules for engagement to get the job done once and for all. Short of that, it's just more targets.

Answer 9

Are you thinking about how many troops the terrorists have? He's just trying to even up the odds. Do you want our troops to be badly outnumbered or do you want them to actually have a chance to defend themselves?

Answer 10

Oh, so you are a military strategist are you? You do know that the additional 21K troops will still be less than the high of 160K we've had in the past right? When you have extensive military battle experience come talk to us, until then you are just making noise.

Answer 11

"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse."


John Stuart Mill