I am not saying that the Afghanistan war is without blemish, but feel the objective and acheivable goals make it worth going to war, whereas this is not true in Iraq.
Do you agree or disagree? And why? I consider myself to be only somewhat informed. I am not very political, but do try to expose myself to a fairly wide range of media (i.e. left-wing / right wing newspapers, CNN, Daily Show, small press newspapers, Yahoo! Answers, etc...)
2007-01-27
07:05:33
·
8 answers
·
asked by
The Smuggler
2
in
News & Events
➔ Current Events
you nailed it, you're 100,000% dead on.
when we went into afghanistan, it was to find Osama, the man in charge of the 9-11 attack. the Iraq war was just a bunch of crap the white house made up, and thats the reason that its such a failure.
the "war on terror" and the war in iraq are not the same war. its sickening that Osama Bin Laden was our prime target, and we were to find him "dead or alive", and then a few months later Bush himself said in a press conference "he's not really a priority right now".
its disgusting what this cabinet has done. everything they've touched has turned to crap.
2007-01-27 07:17:32
·
answer #1
·
answered by hellion210 6
·
4⤊
2⤋
Afghan war would have happened under any president. Taliban forces harbor extremists who launched 911 attack. And they are more improvised forces and cause less US casualties in although it is notoriously difficult place to fight because of rough terrain. Afghan mountains do provide excellent hide outs and the military action against Afghan Taliban was retaliation. It is not like Iraq War which had many political motives and had many proponents since 1991 Iraq War. There were numerous Iraqis dissidents and US leaders who wanted to get rid of Saddam and 9/11 gave them edge on public opinion for new Iraq War. Afghan was really not that political, but little more straight forward retaliation.
2007-01-27 07:29:20
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
As far as Afghanistan is concerned , i dont really much care anymore , presumably it was started to gain something, like Iraq was with the oil , as many americans whole heartedly believe that Iraq was attacked because of the 911 disaster , then im sure the US government will appreciate that thought , but lets not kid ourselves the war in iraq was totaly instigated by the US , in the form of fliying those planes into their own buildings and blaming the middle east to gain support from the US people for going to war only to steal what was not theirs , the oil
2007-01-27 07:21:11
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
the Canadian gov. is fighting a reglious war that they cannot win. It is just going to increase your taxes to pay for this war and lower your quality of life. Is it worth it, no, would I fight in this war,no, do I want to pay for this war in higher taxes, no. The states is fighting the same kind of war and the American people have had enough, they want out. And there war is costing them 120 billion a year. Were only 100 million for the next four years. But that cost will go up too, just give it time. Its too bad the gov. won't listen to the people.
2007-01-27 08:47:10
·
answer #4
·
answered by Bruce 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
that's a morale element for the households of people who've died besides as for the residing provider contributors that they isn't left in the back of. The Joint workers restoration enterprise (JPRA) is a joint company whose sole job is to get well the lacking and are actively looking around the globe for lacking provider contributors as a strategies lower back as WWI. the belief of no longer being left in the back of is a great motivator for provider contributors and their households with the aid of fact it shows the dedication of the U. S. to flow the heavens and the earth to discover the lacking and stop the lifeless from being desecrated or forgotten. Have infantrymen been left in the back of? certainly, there have been distinctive circumstances the place infantrymen have been killed without all and sundry understanding approximately it or the situation became so dire that the physique would desire to no longer be recovered right this moment yet they are at last recovered. from time to time, notably with armored crews, the bodies are so badly burned and torn aside that no longer even DNA samples are conclusive and all human remains recovered are buried in a joint grave. In circumstances like WWI and WWII the place it became purely logistically impossible to return bodies to the States they have been consolidated and buried in united states. yet on the tip of WWI and WWII households would desire to request the return of their significant different and young ones at government price yet maximum chosen to go away them interior the national Cemeteries. as quickly as a provider member dies he will become 2d in priority basically to evacuating the wounded. they are moved to the casualty series factor and deliver out on the 1st airplane or motor vehicle going lower back to a substantial logistical hub (Balad in Iraq or Bagram in Afghanistan) the place that's undemanding to place them on a resupply airplane returning lower back to the U. S..
2016-11-01 10:37:38
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Iraq invasion was a mess from the very beginning and who knows why bush did that, his reasoning is so messed up on anything, Afghanistan was to get Ben Ladin..but since it wasn't taken care of soon enough it has become a mess..and who knows where Ben is....
2007-01-27 07:29:00
·
answer #6
·
answered by xyz 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
All war's are unjust because the leader directing the war never get hurt but the innocent people end up injured or dead.
the iraq warwas unjust because it was selfish, it was because america wanted control over oil to make itself even more powerful, and even though in the afghan war the aim was to get rid of the talibans i still think it was unjust because it's hell there, the way afghanistan is now is hell, all the innocent people suffered thts unjust. just because a small proportion of the country were the tailiban doesnt mean they all were and it wasnt fair the way the were treated.
2007-01-27 07:16:37
·
answer #7
·
answered by intellectual_mind 2
·
0⤊
3⤋
Take this in mind and see how you feel about Iraq. Iraq is very weak right now and can't take care of their self. That means the bad guys can easily walk in and take over. It is in our interest to stop them from taking over until Iraq can take care of itself.
Now you say "well why is it our business if bad guys take over Iraq, whats it matter to me." It matters a lot because when the bad guys take over they will have a foothold to attack other nations including the one you are sitting in. That foothold could throw the whole middle east into more turmoil than its already in,
In this day and age you gotta take out the enemy before he takes yyou out. If you don't its too late. Thats why we couldn't sit over here and let Saddam threaten us. We had to get him out of power, he was a danger to us and even his own people.
2007-01-27 07:20:42
·
answer #8
·
answered by me 3
·
0⤊
4⤋