1.8 million Iraqis displaced, 2994 American lives lost since “Mission Accomplished”, and about $10 billion squandered by the U.S. government on Iraq reconstruction.
There are no WMD's in Iraq. Saddam Hussein is dead. Our troops are mired in a deadly, full-blown civil war. The vast majority -- 70% -- of Americans disagree with his Iraqi policies.....So why does Bush want to escalate our involvement with 21,500 more brave men and women?
2007-02-16 04:08:50 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Just going to state highlights...
Displacement in Iraq is common, but no one should have to leave their home.
Money squandered is horrible, but we waste more in the U.S. I don't agree with it, I want to know where it went, but it isn't a "priority" for me.
One Soldier losing his or her life is too many. I wish we had never gone into Iraq.
WMD's were found, just not in the scope bush has preached. Had we found something more, would have opinions really changed?
On to escalation. I agree with everything you have said above. But I NEVER want to go back either.
Look at this from my point of view. We pull out of Iraq. Everyone gets happy. Iran invades Iraq and occupies. The U.S. will try not to get involved for about a minute and then dedicate troops to go back into fortified cities and reinforced troops.
This is my worst fear. I would rather stick it out right now than to increase my chance of being killed in Iraq from about 20% to 80%. We started the mission, regardless of it's origin and how corrupt it is, we need to finnish it so American troops don't have to go back in there again.
Just my point of view...
2007-02-16 06:02:10 · answer #1 · answered by Q-burt 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
howdy Con, cool, track and tats. And only 3,500 American lives as fee. And ten billion a month, even the months that the Iraqi government takes to the air reason its too warm of their air conditioned workplaces jointly as our troops roam the streets in conflict equipment conserving their azzes. howdy Con, i'm so satisfied those Iraqis are doing so nicely they might take holidays, they could no longer have under Saddam. that is why they love us lots. Yep think of advantageous.
2016-11-23 13:10:04 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because we went there to free them.We did.Went there to take down Hussein,we did.He wants to escalate our involvement to show Iran that they can't romp around the Middle East attacking who ever they please.
We still haven't gotten Osama.I believe he posses a greater threat than anyone.Alqadi and Hezbollah are the biggest threats to our safety at home and abroad.Too the President's credit he has kept us safe at home since September 11.
2007-02-16 04:18:00 · answer #3 · answered by freak33881819 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Not yet.
Pull all the troops out now and see what a "success" it will be. Every terrorist in the world will know that Iraq is a safe haven, because the US will NOT fight there.
Or, stay and get it done, right.
2007-02-16 04:27:38 · answer #4 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It's hard to judge any war when it's not finished. It's successfully given Iraqi women rights, citezens the right to vote, and has freed Iraqi people from Dictatorship.
With that said, there's still violence. Why? Becuase the war is not finished.
2007-02-16 04:17:11 · answer #5 · answered by Mr. Info 3 · 3⤊ 2⤋
He's Prideful. Typical American ego, the need to puff up your chest far exceeds your minute intellectual capacity at all angles. Our real goal was to forcibly colonize the sovereign state of Iraq. Don't ya think we're well on our way now missy?
2007-02-16 04:15:46 · answer #6 · answered by Rick R 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Mission Iraqi Freedom has successfully turned me 100% against the Bush administration.
2007-02-16 04:13:48 · answer #7 · answered by Chi Guy 5 · 3⤊ 3⤋
PHUCK NO!!! We were lied into getting involved. And we've killed a half-million of them. Now, who's the mad dictator? Now we're about to start WW3 w/ Iran. Can we guess how that's going to start? I'm thinking another false 9/11 to get us rallied again.
2007-02-16 05:29:28 · answer #8 · answered by Ted S 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
He's stubborn.
As Colbert said,
"When the president decides something on Monday, he still believes it on Wednesday -- no matter what happened Tuesday."
2007-02-16 04:18:20 · answer #9 · answered by Rick 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
If the troops needed reinforcements to complete the task of securing Baghdad, you wouldn't send them?
Can't we at least see if the strategy works before saying it doesn't???
2007-02-16 04:14:02 · answer #10 · answered by theearlybirdy 4 · 2⤊ 3⤋