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

Why is it that when ever someone wants to devise an exit strategy out of Iraq they are labeled as someone who wants to quit? Wasn't the point to liberate Iraq? To bring them to a point where they can be independent? To make it so they can stand on their own two feet?

And why is a plan that includes putting more troops, temporarily, into Iraq a bad thing if that means the independence of Iraq?

2007-02-25 04:00:05 · 16 answers · asked by FaerieWhings 7 in Politics & Government Politics

Vicroty of what? Our control of Iraq or Iraqi independance?

2007-02-25 04:03:35 · update #1

You people really need to make up your minds. I'm a con one minute and a lib the next. What is it? You guys are the ones who are stuck on labels, not me. I just am what I am. A little bit of everything.

2007-02-25 04:08:00 · update #2

Most of you are putting words into my mouth. I didn't say a public exit plan. But when ever someone talks of setting a strategy in place that will make things a bit more balanced in that country they are called weak and quitters. I hear very very very few people actually talk of pulling the troops out 100% immediately. Most talk of either putting more troops in to bring balance and slowly pulling the troops out. Why is that a bad thing when that was to be the intention to begin with.

2007-02-25 04:17:07 · update #3

16 answers

The exit strategy was to create a viable democracy and then exit, wasn't it?

2007-02-25 04:06:37 · answer #1 · answered by kscottmccormick 6 · 2 1

An exit strategy is a wonderful idea. As long as you do not make it public.
On the other hand how can you create an exit strategy when you don't have a clue how things will look a year or even 6 months from now.
The complexities of this war are immense and if lost it is a very good possibility that a Cold War could ensue along with terror cells being propped up throughout the world with Iraqi oil revenue.

Long gas lines and $7 a gallon if Iran becomes the dominating country in the Middle East and OPEC.

A Cold War with China and there economic growth potential could easily bankrupt America within 40 years.

2007-02-25 04:09:02 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

There are only two options, 1. US troops in Iraq forever or 2. exit strategy at some point. So clearly having an exit strategy of some kind is essential. As to your second question about the surge, the US had these kind of of numbers in Iraq before it did not get the job done. The fundamental question is why do you want to support and stabilise a Shia dominated government in Iraq? Why topple a secular dictator and replace him with a ultra fundementalist muslim theocracy?

2007-02-25 04:12:53 · answer #3 · answered by cimra 7 · 0 0

How is alerting our enemies how and when we plan on withdawling from Iraq a good thing? If I was a terrorist and I knew when and how the United States was pulling out of Iraq, then I would lay low and keep it cool. Then once they split I would step things up! But by not knowing what the US is planning, it keeps terrorists guessing. I realize that Americans have come to expect video game style battlefields and cut and dry victories, but Iraq is going to be a long term investment of US resources. Had we known 4 years ago that this would be the end result would we still have gone in the way we did? Perhaps not. But hindesight is always 20/20. And we need to look forward, not bytch about how we ended up where we are.

2007-02-25 04:09:03 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 2 0

outdoors of the actual shown actuality that the Democrats (no seats are held by a Liberal celebration) have not had the means in twelve years to electrify a vote, and so once you've a difficulty with the way the conflict has been mishandled blame your individual please. it might want to easily be that regardless of packing the finest courtroom its seems you won't be able to easily ban abortions that endanger the health of the mummy. no longer something a lot less might want to seem to do, so Republican judges,Congress, even the President can do no longer something contained in the face of such stubbornness, no longer something short of insisting women human beings die will truly drift the boat of the so-stated as professional-lifers. sure, Democrats do want to honor the sacrifices the warriors have made, yet for the first time in my 60 year memory we haven't any images of rows of solemn flag draped coffins to deliver a tear to ones eye in remembrance. those images, so touching in different wars, were banned by the Bush administration as, by surprise, being 'disrespectful'. So then, replaced into it 'disrespectful' in all the different wars? Or is that this conflict by some potential something which we are not inspired to seem to heavily at, something that isn't undergo the scrutiny of historic previous? I worry extra, i ought to admit, about the residing, respiratory, human with household initiatives and lives, than about an embryo or fetus. that is the way i'm, no apologies about that, and that i do not insist on guidelines that stress abortions, any more desirable than i pick you to insist on guidelines that stress childbirth.

2016-10-17 08:59:18 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

As long as it includes victory and lasting stability, an exit strategy would be welcomed. But if the strategy can't guarantee this, then a different strategy is needed.
Victory in Iraq: winning the peace by overpowering the terrorists and establishing a strong enough government that will hold them at bay as we reduce our troop levels. An Iraqi government strong enough to keep Iran, Al-Qaida, and other terrorist factions away from its people and prosperity.

2007-02-25 04:02:27 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

Having an exit strategy is not a bad thing......BUT....having an exit timetable IS BAD,,,,It is like telling the enemy just hold on till this point and we wont be here anymore.
Giving the enemy a copy of your plans insures losing...

2007-02-25 04:09:36 · answer #7 · answered by Real Estate Para Legal 4 · 1 0

Exit Strategy? = Putting more troops into Iraq?
Temporarily? (They are going to be there for a LONG time, believe me)

Come on, you don't really believe this, or do you?

You forgot to mention 'civil war'.
That changes the whole scenario.
Let them fight their own civil war.

2007-02-25 04:09:23 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

There is 1 & only 1 "exit strategy" that should be acceptable- WINNING!

2007-02-25 04:54:42 · answer #9 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 0 1

Let's say that some bad guys wanted to rob your home and take your things. But you were always home however, one day you told everyone in the neighborhood that you were leaving for vacation and wouldn't be back for a while. Do you think the bad guys would rob you that night or wait till you left to rob you? You've told everyone you're leaving!

2007-02-25 04:10:43 · answer #10 · answered by Texan 6 · 5 2

fedest.com, questions and answers