What if a monkey flies out his colon and beats him? Hypothetical questions are meaningless.
2007-02-28 12:48:58
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
First of all 1/3 of the Iraqi population, no surprise, the richest and best educated left prior to our invasion. Another 1/3 again, the one with means, has left since. This leaves a smaller less educated population which we are seeing is harder to get organized. Consider the state of our country under those circumstances.
We can consider the extent of the resistance as evidence our opponent is much bigger and hence more dangerous than we thought. The continued violence we can also see as evidence our opponent is utilizing and therefore depleting their resources. Every bomb every body is an asset which cannot be recaptured. War is won by the bleeding the enemy dry. So long as we are losing our assets slower than they are, than victory is inevitable. The cost is the main question. Are we willing to pay the price for victory. Well what is the cost? Lives. money, global political capital come to mind. From another perspective, cost can be ascertained by determining the value of the alternatives. If we stop fighting in Iraq and begin the process of cutting and running erh,... leaving. The liberal assumption I guess is that the jihad's will respond in kind by deescalating.That might happen but can we really think the threat will go away. In my opinion not likely. If they are going to continue fighting and they aren't going to fight in Bagdad where will they fight ? Boston?
The very same liberal democratic congress who, nearly without exception, voted in a commander of forces, who, while interviewing , so to speak, for the job advocated the same troop escalation they are attempting to crucify the President with right now. If troop escalation is an issue today why wasn't a litmus test issue that prevented this guys confirmation. The issue has been created. Its getting very ugly. Are we really debating the welfare of Iraq or the distribution of power in the US.
2007-02-28 15:44:47
·
answer #2
·
answered by cvs12345 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
The sad thing is that he is right about not leaving but for the wrong reasons. We created the situation in Iraq. Iraq had a stable government that was not allied with terrorist before we went in there and took the place apart. We are responsible for what is happening there now and We must act responsibly and stay until we fix the mess we made. That is the grown up way of handling a problem. You make a mistake you stay and fix it and clean it up you do not run away
2007-02-28 12:50:21
·
answer #3
·
answered by Thomas G 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
'I was in surgery on the morning of September 11th 2001, just out of surgery the doctor told me while I was awaking to reality that terrorists destroy one World Trade Center building. I could not believe it at the same moment on the radio, the doctor said the other building was destroyed. After reading all the news I thought that the terrorists could be still in the country because of their knowledge about the airline system which most Americans do not understand thus the idea to register students of the airline industry. Also that the United Nations should have registered all the nuclear weapons that were sold to make accountable those nations and their leaders to end the terrorist threat. The tragedy brought to realization that a hero is someone who knows the way to leadership and stand in the way of leadership' from Madison Augustine Primus, http://www.voteprimous.com
2007-02-28 13:29:01
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Just because Osama Bin Laden, a crazed maniac, wrote a book telling Iraqis to kill Americans, doesn't mean that any amount of Iraqis actually agree with him. While some undoubtedly do, they don't represent the entirety of Iraq.
As for leaving the country, I don't think we have much af a choice at this point. While I agree with you about it being an idiotic move to enter Iraq, at this point, leaving would be equally idiotic. We have to clean up the mess we helped cause: by entering Iraq we skrewed with the country, so we have an obligation to do what we promised, along with wiping up our own filth.
2007-02-28 12:47:32
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
Everyone also thought we should leave Hitler alone. Imagine if we had????? I hate to see our boys dying over there but we have many friends in the military, some are just going over and a few have just returned. One thing they all say is that we cannot leave now. It is easy to sit at home here with all of our luxuries and say pull out, but if we do now, our country is up for grabs. We have to finish what we started and t rain their military better.
2007-02-28 12:46:58
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
We are still in Germany....after how may years? Vietnam...yeah still there...every place we have ever fought in war we are still there and will continue to be till when? Everyone worries that we will be there to long well comparitavely it is not very long. Lets support our troups! They want to be there otherwise they would have never signed up to fight for our country.
2007-02-28 12:52:06
·
answer #7
·
answered by tasgunter 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yes, we'll be there for a long, long time...and we should have gone in in 1992 after the Gulf War... perhaps a lot of the terrorist attacks could have been nipped in the bud a lot earlier...
2007-02-28 12:44:03
·
answer #8
·
answered by i_love_my_mp 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
He is right. We should not leave until the government is stable or until they have demonstated a total lack of desire to stabilize the government.
2007-02-28 13:01:03
·
answer #9
·
answered by just the facts 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
He is right about staying. If it becomes another Vietnam, so be it. At least it shows them that we're willing to hold on and not give up without a fight.
2007-02-28 12:46:40
·
answer #10
·
answered by USMC Recon 2
·
1⤊
1⤋