English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

No matter ones opinion about the war, the surge, the consequences of failure, or transferring a growing war debt to future generations -- we are there now. Who can argue that focusing all efforts and most resources on resolution would be wrong? And, none could be accused of cutting fund for military.

2007-01-20 06:51:05 · 2 answers · asked by murphy 5 in Politics & Government Government

We heard from Paul Wolfowitz and other discredited neo-cons that Iraq oil would pay for the war. Now we read that US and UK corporations may be given huge advantages by a worn-torn Iraq on the verge of collapse. That oil money won't go to the US Treasury.

2007-01-21 05:16:45 · update #1

2 answers

Eventually Middle eastern oil will be sold to us at a lower rate in an effort to re-pay the war debt.

If we just pull back to the border the current Iraqi government will extinguish the uprising of extremist but killing tens of thousands of innocent men, women, and children in the process just as Saddam squelched such extremists.

We as Americans still have to protect the "Innocent" in Iraq. Lest we be labeled the new butchers of Baghdad.

2007-01-20 07:34:00 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I do believe we need to figure out a way to get Iraq to function on its own so we can bring our troops home.

This is not going to be from getting rid of the terrorists with our troops. It will be from the Iraqi people finding unity. I'm not gonna hold my breath.

2007-01-20 14:59:32 · answer #2 · answered by ÐIESEŁ ÐUB 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers