enlighten me...so how is the US losing the war?

Question

come on now..dont use the 3000 dead as a indiactor..thats no indiaction on losing a war..come on tell me and I dont want this b.s. on wmds stuff either..Saddam did gas the Kurds..5000 of them would tell ya ..but they are dead..and the Iranians as well..so how are we or America losing the war...I say arent losing its a lie of the liberal media...

Answer 1

U.S. WON THE WAR IN LESS THAN A WEEK...

Just mopping up now.

Answer 2

The US is not winning. Unless there is some other option aside from losing and winning a war, the US is therefore losing. No place the US has actually made secure is, in fact, secure if our base of operations--Baghdad--is this the main point of violence.

Or to put it this way....when we entered World War One, the war was over in 19 months. World War Two we were in for 45 months. This so called war in Iraq has now gone on for 46 months, with no end in sight, against a far smaller threat than either the Kaiser or the Nazis. We are not even 100% sure who the enemy is and what to do about them. That is far from a success.

Answer 3

It's not a question of "losing" the war. Rather it's a question of whether or not winning the war (as defined by thopse who advocated the policy) is possible. Winning has been defined as the U.S. maintaining its presence in Iraq until the government can stand on its own (protecting itself from non-Democratic change -- i.e. a rebellion or civil war).

The Bush administration preaches that it is U.S. interests for such a stable government to exist.

The problem is there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY that the U.S. will ever be able to prevent Iran's influenece from inevitablly creeping into the Iraq government. Iran is now working helping construction projects in southern Iraq (including train stations along a line that will connect to Tehran). Al-Maliki has already visited. al-Sadr gets money from Tehran.

If Iran will inevitablly have influence and an alliance with the Shiia led Iraqi government (which seems inevitable) wiunning, as described by the Bush administration (which is in the U.S. interest) is not possible.

Answer 4

The reason became into lacking help at homestead. The individuals, bored with engaging in this high priced and persistent engagement (nicely over a decade of armed forces involvement), have been searching for a stable way out. It became right into a huge element of opposition in the federal elections. The Paris Peace Accords have been seen as an hazard to ultimately leave on a similar time as nonetheless saving face. Predictably, North Vietnam and the 'Viet Cong' communities nonetheless persisted to depose the South Vietnamese government besides, yet that became into it - the U. S. had adequate and saved their involvement afterwards to a bare minimum. It became into obvious that South Vietnam had little hazard of putting on by utilising themselves, without finished American armed forces help. on the time of the Paris Peace Accords, the yankee government believed that this became into their honorable, if-no longer-positive-then-at-least-a-tie go out from the conflict. of course that's no longer the favored view international at present. As you assert, the North Vietnamese ultimately performed their objective, on a similar time as the individuals gave up.

Answer 5

The US/UK alliance isn't 'losing' the war, but they sure aren't winning it either. By 'the war' do you refer to the war on terror? If so, i'd like to mention the war on drugs. You can't fight an ideology with guns and bombs. Wars can only be fought against a structured military with definite leaders. We don't even know who we are fighting right now! The insurgents in Iraq don't wear uniforms, they don't take commands from a central leadership. They consist of small cells of civilians fighting a guerilla war on the streets of Iraq.

Answer 6

This has become a forever war with no military solution.
We can't make progress beyond some short term operations.
It will be a permenant police action, syphoning off money and lives with no end in sight. There won't be any victory.

Answer 7

We defeated a hated foe of Iran, destabilzed an important oil producing nation, put shii'ite fundamentalists with political sympathies for Iran in power, and created a civil war. So, if this is victory I would hate to see your idea of a really bundled U.S. policy!

Answer 8

Is there peace in Iraq right now?

If not, does the situation require a political or a military solution?

If political, why are our armies still there?

If military, how come our armies - the very best in the world - haven't solved it yet?

Answer 9

I'm so glad to see that you "care" so much about those fine dead americans. What's a few thousand more huh? FOR NOTHING dude. So put on your flak jacket ,grab your flag and bible and go "save" us all John Wayne. Oh yea, you might have to leave the comfort of your chair to do that.

Answer 10

you contend that bush is WINNING? LOL Up to you to provide some proof.

By the way, why aren't YOU over there fighting, yellowbelly?

Answer 11

bush is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. the libs and their back pocket media will spin it anyway they can in their favor and most of America will believe it because they are too stupid to do the research for themselves. Half of America doesn't even know their own American history.