Because they have a HUGE fear of President Bush becoming a historic figure for anything other than something negative. If we were to win, Iraq become a thriving nation, well, Bush would be responsible for that. If we lose and Iraq goes into a 1000 year civil war, well Bush would be responsible for that.
2007-01-21 02:27:30
·
answer #1
·
answered by Need Answers 3
·
1⤊
4⤋
The U.S. does still have trops stationed in Germany, true, but the last madman is nowhere near removed. There is still a very healthy Nazu party there and they have some members right here in the good old U.S.A.
There is nothing to actually lose in Iraq. We won the war. The job was done. Right now we are mopping up the mess we made in winning. Ultimately the Iraqi people will have to govern themselves. This may mean that the current government and perhaps several subsequent governments will fail. The U.S. didn't have a particularly peaceful growth either. Remember the Civil War?
2007-01-21 10:32:13
·
answer #2
·
answered by fangtaiyang 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
If this is a serious (though quite clumsily phrased )question, not just more propaganda from one of Rush Limbaugh's Strident Moronity. I'll answer it as honestly as I can.
Do you SERIOUSLY believe it's in ANY liberal's best interest to LOSE a war? Or to even WANT to? What would a Liberal POSSIBLY have to gain by losing this war?
You refer to the US forces stationed in Southwest Germany, a byproduct of Germany's defeat in WW2. Germany, had at this point, been the major cause of both World Wars, which cost many countries many millions of the lives of their citizens. To ensure Germany could not raise an army capapble of ever doing this again, the "winners" of WW2 (the Soviet Union, Great Brition, The US and France) split Germany up into four sectors. England, the US and France getting the west, the Soviet Union controlling the east half of Germany.
Since the fall of the Berlin Wall and the pretty complete collapse of the old Soviet Union, the boundaries of the sectors are even more ignored today than ever before, Germany is once again, a united country.
And we have nowhere near the forces in Germany we had there even when George Bush the First was President; I know, I was stationed at the 103 MI BN subordinate to the 3rd Infantry Division, Wurzburg, Bavaria from 1986 to 1988. That unit is now stationed in Georgia (American Georgia, not Russian Georgia).
At the height of the cold war, Warsaw Pact countries (to the US and its allies, the Warsaw Pact were the bad guys) in Europe had approximately 15 Combat Divisions for EACH NATO Division actually stationed in Europe. Our Battle Plan was "fight valiently, hold em off as long as you can, prepare your wills now".
We signed treaties saying we would stay there for the good of world peace. To prevent any more homicidal monsters from killing innocent people. Then the UN decided that was THEIR job, to decide who is being oppressed and who isnt. The US, didnt like it, but stood back as Korea almost went completely Communist, until we were INVITED to intercede on behalf of the legitimate Korean (well, now SOUTH Korean govt), then repeated the mistake in Vietnam.
George W. Bush's own FATHER was smarter than to try to set up shop in ANY Middle Eastern country. They do not like non Muslims living in their land, it's simple as that This is why he never went after Saddam himself. He did, however, tell revolutionaries in Iraq to depose him and the US would be there to help and support them. They tried, the US reneged and many thousands of Saddam's domestic enemies were tortured and murdered.
2007-01-21 11:02:15
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
And how did you arrive at that far fetched conclusion? How is wanting to protect the lives of our soldiers wanting to lose?
War is not a football game, and until you war crazy blood loving idiots get that through your thick skull, we'll never be able to make progress in this world.
2007-01-21 10:28:58
·
answer #4
·
answered by Rosebee 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
take a a census, that asks if we agree or disagree with the war on Iraq. if the people who agree, are willing to fund the entire thing, and consent to their offspring paying thes left-over bills from it, then do what you will.
2007-01-21 10:35:26
·
answer #5
·
answered by qncyguy21 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Because they are willing to vigorously fight domestic traditionlist/conservatives that are keeping them out of power more than they willing to fight external forces that are trying to kill them.
2007-01-21 10:33:11
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Want to lose?...oh yeah, find me one quote or anything to back up that statement!
GMAB
Silly question.
2007-01-21 10:40:23
·
answer #7
·
answered by kissmybum 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Why do you want to maintain the delusion that we can win?
2007-01-21 10:25:46
·
answer #8
·
answered by ck4829 7
·
3⤊
3⤋