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

would you do to get out and in what time frame?

2007-02-01 22:07:31 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

11 answers

If we just pull out, there is a good possibility of a major war breaking out in the Middle East divided by religious lines. While my first thought is so what, I have to say if one really looks at the implications of that it would be a disaster for more than just the Middle East.If Iran pushes for the Shiite Majority and arms them, Saudi has said they will step in on the side of the Sunnis. The first step they will take (their word here) is to drop the price of oil as low as they can to starve Iran, as it is Iran's only real source of Income. Once they do that Iran and Syria will be forced to try and use their Military to stop Saudi. What they will do is close the straights to shipping. Pretty soon oil shipping would start to dry up and the price of oil would double or triple present day prices. This would affect both Europe and Americas economy. We either stay till Iraq is stable (if you want to drive)
or we need to shut down the borders with Syria.
The other option I have wondered about was to arm the Kurds to the teeth, let the Shiites and Sunnis fight between themselves and then have the Kurds take over and have their Kurdistan!

2007-02-01 22:57:01 · answer #1 · answered by mark g 6 · 0 0

Leave, get out and let the chips fall where they may. If Iraq, Iran, Syria, Lebanon and other countries supporting this crazy fundamentalist Muslim movement are so intent on destroying each other, let them. If conditions get bad enough, other countries will be more than happy to have our soldiers there to protect them and their interests, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait etc. Oil for protection, no more something for nothing. Pull our troops back now, as long as they are in Iraq, they are targets.

2007-02-01 23:07:50 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Option one: Instate the draft, we would have enough troops to stay the course and complete the task.
Option two: Move most of the US troops to neighboring regions to strengthen our troops. Countries such as Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait. Close enough to go into Iran, and also Iraq if need be. This would make us stronger in regards to Iran since our troops would be free to move into Iran in a flash. Iraqis would fight their own civil war or shape up. It is more in the national interest of the USA to move out of Iraq because just the thought would make both Malliki and Ahdhiminajad shiver.
By the looks of things we are going to redeploy and move into Iran shortly any ways.

2007-02-01 22:54:44 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

Wrong question. What do we do to achieve victory in Iraq. Simply getting out of Iraq does nothing.

2007-02-01 23:09:37 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

How many other alternatives do you need? Why cant you think for yourself? Dems and Repubs have been listing alternatives for MONTHS now, no one in the Republican held government wanted anything to do with "alternatives"; if it didn't mean invading Iraq, it wasnt given any attention.

I myself came up a ton of alternate ways to go about this crap in Iraq. It isn't hard to think of something other than "bomb them and steal their oil (for peace and safety and freedom and democracy and life and liberty and industry and still no running water or electricity in Baghdad)"

Ive answered thi sbefore so forgive for just pasting my previous answer, which follows:

1. We have to ensure Iraqis understand we are NOT staying. When we build permanent bases and the LARGEST US Embassy in the World in their country, this does not promote the idea we are leaving anytime soon. By telling them over and over (and over, if necessary) about how we are NOT staying in their country in any way they do not wish, this alone will dramatically decrease the people terrorist organizations would be able to recruit.
2. Stop shoving incredible amounts of money at Halliburton and give Iraqi construction companies, labor forces, etc. a chance to make some money. Get the water and the electricity on. Start rebuilding. Get some hospitals and schools built. With the money we've already spent in Iraq, the entire city of Baghdad could have been rebuilt MANY times. Get some teachers in there. Get the factions together to either work out their differences or admit defeat, leave office and maybe the population can elect leaders who CAN work out their differences.
3. Get serious with this National Iraqi Police Force. If theyre going to take over, they need to get their thumb out and TRAIN to take over. It's been almost 4 years. The US trains a soldier, from raw recruit to lethal fighting machine, in about 70 days (or less). WHAT IS THE PROBLEM HERE? Once Iraqis understand they WONT have the US forces to blame for everything, they will get off their butts and assist in rebuilding.
4. Immediately hire and ship 50,000 bomb sniffing dogs and their handlers to Iraq. Anyone (carrying bombs or explosives) the dogs react to is shot, then and there. Then when identified, their families are arrested. We have to make it too expensive to suicide bomb ANYONE, let alone US soldiers. Begin training Iraqis on to train their dogs to be explosive sniffers. Let them gradually take these jobs over, as we move out of these areas. They have no reason to protect American forces; protecting their own people is a different story.
5. We draw out of the cities, and secure the border between Iraq and any neighbors who might be allowing weapons and personnel to enter Iraq from their countries. And this is just me, typing off the top of my head. There are literally thousands of places online and in your library to do your own research, but it's easier, I know, to assume that because YOU cant think of anything smarter to do than repeat what Rush Limboid spoonfeeds you, NO one can think of better ways.

You remind me of Steve Martin in "The Man with Two Brains". He is falling in love with Evil Kathleen Turner, and asks the portrait of his late wife for a sign as to whether he should marry Turner or not. The house starts rumbling, the portrait starts spinning on the wall, thunder, lightning, gale-force winds and a ghostly voice screams, "NO! NOOOOO!!" After several minutes of violent activity, the noises and disturbances cease. Steve then says, "Just any sign at all, dear. Anything, let me know how you feel."

2007-02-01 23:01:46 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I would force the Iraqi people to take control of the situation by moving the US troops away from the fighting mostly to guard the borders so that there isn't any outside interference if they insist on having their civil war.

2007-02-01 22:14:38 · answer #6 · answered by Al Dave Ismail 7 · 3 1

sorry man,american ego and say we were defeated isa the issue ,if they just say lets go home it would be more easier ,but they r jewish financed and ego as big a s a mountain and afraid the world says bush is a defeated wrong president,the withdraw will happen bush knows it ,but wants it after he is out of office not while he is in it

2007-02-01 22:12:02 · answer #7 · answered by reifguy 4 · 3 2

I would stay the course, send in more troops, get the job finished quick by any means necessary and then get all the troops out. Six months would be enough time if the right amount of Troops are their to finish the job.

2007-02-01 22:16:00 · answer #8 · answered by m c 5 · 1 5

I'll be the first to admit. I have no idea. I wish Bush the best of luck. He is simply standing by his committment.

2007-02-01 22:35:32 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

Just pullout.
If they slaughter each other so what.
That would just be doing a job that Americans don't want.

2007-02-01 22:14:34 · answer #10 · answered by Mullet Head 2 · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers