would they be blaming him for those deaths as well?
2007-02-07 00:55:38 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Sorry, like the democrats wanted him to.
2007-02-07 00:56:14 · update #1
there are only two ways to handle this
get bigger, send 100,000 troops more and gain total control of the country, in every road and town
or
get the hell out of there and stop the murder of our guys
2007-02-07 00:59:54 · answer #1 · answered by layjc01 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
If enough troops were originally sent, doubling our presence, the whole thing would be over I imagine. Seems like we probably will keep some manner of ground force there such as we have done in Germany...no matter when the withdrawal begins.
I cannot understand why we are not doing more and more covert efforts. It is the THUGS in Iraq who continue to be the aggressors so we need to use similar THUG-style tactics. When their militants fire one grenade launcher toward civilians or our troops, answer it with ten in their direction.
There is nothing civil about war.
Oliver North declared Osama Bin Laden as a terrorist when before Al Gore and his hearing committee....and Gore was too deaf and blind to understand his message. Clinton gave the word to release political prisioners and one returned the favor by flying a plane into the WTC tower on 9/11.
Uncivilized people have no regard for the lives of those they HATE. There is no level of "reasoning" when HATE is involved. You can only defeat the ones who HATE by extreme force. It sounds cruel and cold, but they understand nothing else. Unfortunately, we seem to be near that point in many of the crime-filled areas in our own cities.
We are a nation built on freedoms, but without police or military action there would be no freedoms to enjoy. If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read this in English, and worship in a church of your choosing, thank the military. And if you have to read this to someone who dropped out of school and cannot read, you are a kind and forgiving person.
2007-02-07 01:18:41 · answer #2 · answered by donkey hotay 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
the problem with the start of the Iraq war, is it was too polite.
Forget shock and awe, it should have been more boom and blow. Can't enter the mosques, that infringement on their religions, you have to be careful when you do arrest an insurgent you may bruise their hands when you zip tie them, while you are there any soldiers cannot eat or have pork products shipped to them, because it offends their faith. No mouthwash for the soldiers unless it has no alcohol, again we may offend them.
So yea I can see why there have been so many deaths, if they had been allowed to do their job in the first place this would have all been over with. So instead of blaming Bush, people need to blame CONGRESS.
2007-02-07 01:17:38 · answer #3 · answered by Chrissy 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It was not only the Democrats. The Administration rejected the advice of many of their military professionals. I recognize that the military cannot be given everything it asks for - but these requests for more troops up front were based on cogent military judgments based on experience and knowledge of practical warfare. Senior officers were relieved of their posts and more compliant officers installed in their place - but officers whose prime concern is placating political masters often foul up military missions.
So the operation went ahead with insufficient troops to exploit battlefield success - and the result has been disastrous. Had their been enough troops to nail down a peace there would have been fewer casualties - that would probably have taken another full division.
What we are seeing now looks sadly like "too little, too late".
2007-02-07 01:04:39 · answer #4 · answered by Tony B 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In an asymmetrical war, where one side has unlimited firepower and the other only the ability to hang on taking all that the other side throws at them, there are bound to be more casualties on both sides, over a long term than in straight out mechanical War.
Why the American Democrats went along with the jingoistic patriotism of the early days of the war confuses me did they learn nothing from Vietnam?
The more Americans in Iraq he more Americans die.
2007-02-07 01:07:51 · answer #5 · answered by salubrious 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
QUOTE
"Sorry, like the democrats wanted him to"
What the hell are you talking about!!
The 4th ID was sitting on a ship because Turkey would not allow them entry to invade Iraq from the north. This means that the US went ahead and invaded Iraq with only half of the forces planed.
2007-02-07 01:40:05 · answer #6 · answered by tom l 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Of course he is responsible for EVERY person who has died in Iraq since 9/11/2001.
Just read the NY Times.
2007-02-07 00:58:46 · answer #7 · answered by kingstubborn 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
the will of people is the strongest force possible, no amount of troops can get iraqis to like the americans.
2007-02-10 17:40:48 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
They should have sent more...and blown up every mosque also
there have been a lot of mistakes.
War is neither scripted or perfect. People die. Hopefully they are all bad guys.
2007-02-07 00:59:03 · answer #9 · answered by pilotB 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
i don't think we should even be at war right now but maybe if he would have sent more at the beginning it would be over by now.
2007-02-07 00:59:56 · answer #10 · answered by Kueryn 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋