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

"The consequences of failure are immense. I think it destabilizes the entire Middle East, encourages Iran and on top of that it's pretty clear that the terrorists will just follow us home." Rep. John Boehner. Am i missing something here? have we not already seen failure and it's consequences? Is the middle east not destabilized? Has Iran been encouraged by our failure thus far? And how will terrorists follow us home? On magic carpets?

2007-02-06 09:16:09 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

18 answers

We haven't seen failure and consequences on the level of pulling out of Iraq. If we did that, terrorists would no longer fear us. We haven't failed in Iraq yet. Pulling out would be admitting defeat. Wars are not won overnight and are not easy. The reason the Middle East is destabilized is because of radicals like Mahmoud Ahamdinejad. People like him terrorize the people in the Midlle East and keep it from a better life. How do you think they will follow us home? The same way everybody else gets here. In case you hadn't noticed, we have a huge wide open border to the south that terrorists can easily cross. If Mexicans can do it, why can't terrorists. How much more encouraged to you think Iran would be if our 100,000 + troops that are right next door went home? We are trying to stabilize the Middle East by bringing freedom to people. Radical Islam is what has destabilized the Middle East, not the U.S.

2007-02-06 09:26:47 · answer #1 · answered by Blah 1 · 2 2

Hate to tell you but they are here already.....approximately 1400 cells nationwide. But a defeat in Iraq "will" destabilize the middle east far more then it is right now. It was inevitable that we would become involved. The jihadists just helped it along a little bit on 9-11. Saddam pushed his weight around once too often and got slapped around. Then he decided to tell the U.N. to kiss off while having violated the cease fire agreement with the U.N. in Kuwait and signed an unconditional surrender which he promply violated on numerous occasions. Then the U.S. and its allies had enough of the BS and went back in and put an end to a tyrants reign. Then the huge number of nutcases have come out of the woodwork and have killed large numbers of innocent folks in the name of God. The surest way for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing. And the list in this last category is growing by leaps and bounds as many important people want to tuck tail and run. The surest way to die is to run away from a mad dog. he will track you down and kill you when possible. And the jihadists are at least a rung below the dog. At least the dog has an excuse. The Jihadists have said this is certainly their intention. For one, I believe them. Fight them there or fight them here. Our choice. And remember. The enemy has a vote.

2007-02-06 09:39:04 · answer #2 · answered by Rich S 4 · 1 1

We've destabilized the Middle East? Yeah, right! Like it was stable as the Rock of Gibraltar before we butted in! What has that dude been smoking? As for the terrorists following us home, of course they will. Right now, it's easier for them to get to Iraq, which is right in their neighborhood, so to speak, than it is to come over here. Why come all the way over here, when you can kill Americans practically on your own doorstep? But if we pull out, they'll follow us home like a bad smell. You just wait and see if they don't!

2007-02-06 09:39:37 · answer #3 · answered by texasjewboy12 6 · 2 0

Well, you see what happens.
You remove 1 idiot, the next one takes over.
The US is destined to fail.
It is Dejavu all over again
The British did the same thing years ago.
Iraa has been through every sort of government and dictatorship is the only thing that seems to work.
So, even if the US does instill some sort of government for the short term, over the long term, it won't make a difference.
The US is just putting a band-aid on a gaping wound.

How will terrorists follow us home?
Countries and religions can't help but to cross boundries. Oil and trade and products of boundaries. If something happens in the middle east to disrupt trade, then it effects people. Economically, Socially and morally.

2007-02-06 09:37:38 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

That is more BS than on the barnyard. Scare tactics make great propaganda when a would be dictator wishes to take over. Has anyone bothered, on your side, to consider the fact that they don't want us there and that is why they do what they do? Maybe if we leave they will be stuck Arab on Arab and Muslim on Muslim. Suni on Shia and Shia on Suni. Everybody on the poor old Kurds. But that will be NONE of OUR BUSINESS. They want to live in the 14th Century and we should let them.

Can you imagine what the billions spent on that fiasco could have accomplished in research and development of alternatives to oil? Nothing to do with global warming either but letting the people there be what they want to be, left alone in their 14th Century world. If we don't need their oil and no one else does either they won't be able to afford to hassle us.

You are absolutely right we have already seen failure and its consequences in the quagmire we get deeper and deeper in all the time. Guess what, that is just the tip of the iceberg.

Sometimes you gotta know when to hold 'em and know when to fold 'em. George your hand is done fold your cards and move away from the table. Let the real leaders and diplomats play this game.

2007-02-06 09:32:46 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Well, if we withdraw from the Middle east and give them room to operate freely in training and weapons and recruiting. The the risks of us being attacked are far greater. I think it's definitely better to keep them preoccupied over there than to sit back and wait for another attack. Besides, we already know what happens when we sit back and wait. Does 9/11 ring a bell? So for people to say it is hard for them to come here makes no sense. Besides we have around 1400 cells operating in this country right now.

2007-02-06 10:25:15 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Do not be so short sighted. The terrorists are not stupid. They learned their lesson from 9/11, attack american and there will be repercutions. Attack their weaker allies and they will stop supporting us (ie Spain). If they attack america now, it will only strengthen Americas resolve and hurt their efforts. There are terrorist groups here and they will attack as soon as we have pulled out of Iraq and the American people have elected people in power that will refuse to fight at almost any cost. Do you think they will not attack if we pull out? You are right, the terrorists are already here, waiting to influence our elections and push public opinion. Lets hope they fail.

2016-05-24 00:45:06 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

it's the same song and dance as Vietnam... "we can't lose Vietnam because then communism will spread all over the world and take over America"...

well... it didn't...

people who live in what basically amounts to third world conditions have few options for an organized attack on a country halfway across the world...

now terrorists are a problem... but Iraq is much more a civil war, than a terrorist issue... and Osama is much more of a threat than anyone in Iraq ever will be... yet they're not worried about him?

2007-02-06 10:19:36 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

The "terrorists" are already on our soil, and they will continue to enter the United States until we stop giving them good reasons to hate us.

Our real failure in Iraq has been the arrogant assertion that we should provide them with a new government modeled after our own. That kind of behavior is an example of why people hate the United States government.

If we'd gone in searching for weapons that we accused Saddam of hiding from inspectors, given up on finding them, and pulled out again, we'd be able to call it a day.

Instead we are in a protracted battle with people who really just want to go about their lives killing each other in peace.

2007-02-06 09:36:26 · answer #9 · answered by Martin Pedersen 6 · 0 2

We destabilized the middle east, IRAQ.. Saddam had it all under control, no terrorists, no weapons of mass destruction then or now, but our presence has destabilized Iraq to the point of civil war.

Iran is sending their people in, not the least bit afraid of the big bad U.S..... Saudi Arabia is sending in people and supporting the terrorists. None of this was happening when the legal ruler of Iraq was there ...Only after the U.S. stuck it's nose in where it didn't belong did all hell break loose.

If they come to the U.S. then you can thank President Bush and his cronies for it. They were no terrorists in Iraq before the U.S. invaded a country and removed it's legal leader....

Thanks Mr. Bush you idiot...

2007-02-06 09:30:39 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2 3

fedest.com, questions and answers