The defeatocrats are all upset and saying that 21,000 would not help, But when the Brit's announce they are gonna send 1600-2000 of their troops home the defeatocrats act like it's a disaster? So dems what is your answer? Can you all make up your mind?
2007-02-21 10:19:36 · 7 answers · asked by Classic96 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
They have no answer and they have no strategy for Iraq- all they do is criticize Bush without offering an alternative.
2007-02-21 10:58:25 · answer #1 · answered by mcc123 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
ok. lets look at it this way.
soldiers work in shifts, just as any other human being. they need sleep, food, and time for recreational activities.
youre looking at 8-10 hours tops per shift.
you really only have 7,000 troops on duty at any moment.
the total area of Iraq is 438000 km2, and given that the current us occupation is approximately 200000,
(200000+20000)/438000
roughly 1 soldier per 2 km2
you have only one soldier per 2 kilometers squared.
Now lets observe the Los Angeles Police Department, who has 9000 officers and occupies 437 square miles. This translates roughly into 1100 square kilometers, so youre looking at about 9 officers/km.
i daresay that adding 900 more officers (10%) would do much good for los angeles county and its gang related problems.
do you think there will be any significant change violence? even with the 10% boost, the majority of violence in iraq is not targeted at us troops, rather we are caught in the crossfire of a sunni-vs.-shi'a feud. our soldiers cannot effectively prevent violence from occuring; much like the LAPD cannot do much about Blood Vs. Crip violence, except get shot at by both sides and hated by everyone.
also, it is not the number of troops britain is sending home that is disturbing to democrats. it is simply symbolic of the fact that the rest of the world acknowledges lacks confidence in our success in this war. This exemplifies their belief as a party that the Iraq War is a disaster; a poorly executed coup de 'etat.
the democrats are not upset over withdrawal of troops, they are upset that we are not taking steps towards doing so ourselves in the near future.
start thinking realisticly, we have no other options other than lesser degrees of failure, and i would much rather call it quits now than send in another 20000 of our children to get shot in a stubborn denial of failure; and then cutting my losses.
2007-02-22 01:29:52 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because they want us to lose this war because they hate bush and they want to make him look bad and make themselves look like the heroes.
But i think it's getting close to the end of this war, we've been their for almost 5 years, and no improvement!
Send those troops, it's our last chance, if it doesn't work, bring them back home. I support this war, but if they can't find a way to win, i say they should pull them out until they find a good strategy.
2007-02-21 18:32:11 · answer #3 · answered by huerito323 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
because they want to endanger our current troops there. How can our men survive without more funding and reinforcement. We know for sure that democrats will pull our troops out there sooner or later; why cutting things before our troops get out?
2007-02-21 18:37:44 · answer #4 · answered by holyfire 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Who's acting like it's a disaster for the British to go home? Kudos to them, they're being sensible. We should do the same!
2007-02-21 18:26:37 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
pleasing Kuwait and Saudi Arabia
2007-02-21 18:22:31 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
lol @ "defeatocrats"
2007-02-21 18:26:56 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋