that if we were to leave Iraq next week, that it will be the end of our troubles?
if so.. you're living in lalaland. and are beyond help
if not, then why shouldn't we stay there and fight them?
2007-02-17 10:27:23 · 21 answers · asked by chumpchange 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Gandhi was a fruitcake, sure he had some nice "sayings" but he was visualizing a dreamworld that could never exist on this planet..
he wasn't realistic at all.
2007-02-17 11:04:09 · update #1
When the U.S. Supreme court ruled that TAXES were unconstitutional upon the American Citizen they passed the illegal 16th amendment that destroyed the 4th and 14th amendment with the establishment of the IRS. All the FDR liberals are concerned with is increasing taxes, establishing socialism and redistribution of the wealth to non working lazy individuals thereby creating a fascist society. 1943 was the beginning of the end for the middle class American. They are a defeatist political party with only one goal - The destruction of the American way of life. Clinton Taxed the American by 241 billion dollars - that was an increase of taxes to what we were already paying. The minimum wage bill they are trying to pass reduces taxes on business by 1.3 billion dollars but increases taxes in other areas by 1.4 billion dollars. Gee I wonder who is getting that burden.
2007-02-17 10:43:45 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
>>do you honestly believe ..?
that if we were to leave Iraq next week, that it will be the end of our troubles?
No, of course not. But do you honestly believe that anything productive can be achieved by remaining in Iraq when virtually all of the Iraqi Sunni population and a majority of the Shia want Americans out and see American soldiers as legitimate targets? Do you think victory is on the cards when Americans control - after four years - a tiny sliver of Baghdad and a handful of southern cities? Is there going to be a glorious liberation when the only thing that can unify fractious ethnic and sectarian communities, as they sink deeper into a bloody civil war, is their mutual hatred of the American occupiers?
>> why shouldn't we stay there and fight them?
Fight who? The entire population of Iraq (minus the Kurds)?? For what? What do you hope to achieve?
2007-02-17 18:35:34 · answer #2 · answered by surroundedbyimbeciles 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It won't be the end of our troubles but it is the best option. There are multiple reasons we should leave Iraq.
1. 60% of the Iraqis want us dead, and 80% of them want us out of their country.
2. There are no good options in Iraq, and no way to win it, so either we can wait another 5 years and end up in the same place we are now. We have to withdraw at some point, and no matter when we do it, it will be chaotic.
3. Our men and women in uniform are dying for no reason, we originally went into Iraq to get rid of Saddam, and now that we've done that it's time to get out.
2007-02-17 18:35:14 · answer #3 · answered by Alex T 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I love GratefulDead06's Ghandi quote.
No, of course I don't believe that. For one thing, I want us to start leaving Iraq, not to pull everyone out all at once--we need to ease our exit with the Iraqi government that is supposedly an ally of ours. But do you honestly believe that if we STAY in Iraq for two more years, THAT will be the end of all our troubles?
We'll have troubles either way. But by a phased withdrawal from Iraq, at least losing more Americans in another country's civil war won't be one of them.
2007-02-17 18:42:16 · answer #4 · answered by Vaughn 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Actually if we leave it WILL be a problem as we have destroyed the country and destabilized the region. If we stay it will be a problem because the military does not have enough force in the region to complete its mission. Before we attacked they stated they needed ruffly 400,000 well equipped troops for 4 to 5 yrs. Stay or go we have a large problem on our hands for along time to come. The only way it wouldn't have been a problem is if we hadn't of gone in the first place.
2007-02-17 18:36:41 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No. We could stay there until the end of time and the Iraqis would not be any more ready to take control for themselves. So we might as well avoid all the wasted lives, time, and resources and pull out now. The Iraqis have to stand up at some point, so it may as well be right now.
2007-02-17 18:30:52 · answer #6 · answered by some_guy_times_50 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Do you honestly believe staying there and getting attacked every single day by non Al qaeda combatants is making things better? Plus Al qaeda is a C.I.A. invented organization anyway, so who in the hell are we really fighting anyway. But I suppose I'm in lalaland from reading declassified government documents then anyway right? sheep
2007-02-17 18:37:08 · answer #7 · answered by 33 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, but I believe it would help more than it would hurt.
Ghandi - a fruitcake! You are exactly the reason I am becoming intolerant of you conservatives! Support all wars somewhere else. Cheer on when the innocent die somewhere else.
2007-02-17 19:28:05 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If we lose in Iraq & if we lose to the Terrorists and have a lot of attacks, the Democrat Party will gain Money & Power from their friends.
The Democrats always bet against the USA.
2007-02-17 19:05:28 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
It will be the end of our trouble in Iraq, we will still have to deal with the George W Bush problem
2007-02-17 18:30:23 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋