I'm not really asking this to decide if you are republican or democrat I am more interested in knowing if this would be the best thing to do for the Iraqi people as well as the American people. What would be some of the pro's and con's to doing so? I think that we should pull out of Iraq because too many people are dying that don't have to, american and the locals there in Iraq.
2007-03-08 07:00:42 · 21 answers · asked by 1982 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I think proposing timing for a pull out, whether it occurs or not, will make the Iraqi people step up to the plate and take more control of their country.
Iraq is like the adult child that won't move out of their parents house. Why take matters into their own hands when the USA is footing the bill with both troops and money.
2007-03-08 07:07:36 · answer #1 · answered by Overt Operative 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
True, people are dying, but not many wars are fought without loss. If we pulled out, we'd be saving lives in the short run. But also, since Iraq is not strong enough yet to handle the violence by themselves, the Iraqi government would collapse and all the American efforts and money spent so far would be in vain. The idea is to make Iraq a democratic society, which could then influence the surrounding nations. This war is just part of the ongoing conflict to end communism.
2007-03-08 07:12:05 · answer #2 · answered by belliott_777 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
You are damned if you do and damned if you don't.
The Bush administration has to realize the situation in the middle east will never be democratic or peaceful.
The military has to at least complete the training of Iraqi soldiers and slowly pull out, but you need a deadline and stick with it or the Iraqis will never fight for themselves.
Right now the Iraqis are made at the US military for not protecting the 1 million Shiite pilgrims. Why can't the Iraqi military protect them????
2007-03-08 07:14:10 · answer #3 · answered by Global warming ain't cool 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Bush will determine that no troops come living house until the job is achieved. If the job isn't carried out, the Democrats, if elected to the Presidency in 2008, would be forced to go on checklist as leaving at the back of Iraq, purely like they did Vietnam.
2016-10-17 21:33:27 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am over in Iraq right now. This is the way i see it.
The American Military is like a sponge in Iraq. Has there been any terrorist attacks on US Soil lately? No.
Why???!?!?! We are in Iraq. Its a whole helluva lot easier for insurgents and terrorists to come to Iraq than to sneak into the USA. So they come here to try to do their "jihad".
We die over here, yes. More of them die. 10 fold. We are winning this war, however slowly it is going to take. We will root them all out eventually if they keep coming.
If we leave, everything the Americans that have died for will be nothing, The Iraqi Government is getting closer to being able to stand up, but it is not yet ready. It is doing great though, and MUCH progress has been made.
THE MOST IMPORTANT OUTCOME OF US LEAVING WOULD BE, the terrorists will follow us home. I swear to you they will. They are not going to stop.
We must stay here for however long it is needed and prove to the world that we can pay the price.
Americas policy is not to negoiate with terrorism. By us leaving, wouldnt that be negoiating? We would just do what they want us to do.
We must stay!
2007-03-08 07:14:16 · answer #5 · answered by hoodyhudak 1 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Absolutely not. Iraq is an ally to the USA now. We won't leave them to be attacked and taken over by Iran, or any other terrorist peoples. We never left Germany, Albania, France, or England. We won't leave any country we have a foot in, which is right. I don't mean it negatively, either. To continue in peace, a stronger power must stay involved. We will win the war on terror, but to do so means to have more allies, and an understanding of the countries we want to make peace in. There is no such thing as peace, without war to make it happen.
2007-03-08 07:08:17 · answer #6 · answered by xenypoo 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I'd say it's a superb idea if all troops come home no later than april 15th 2008.
And when i say come back home, i mean come back unharmed, not in plastic bags.
It's the best thing for the iraqi people as well. They will find a suitable solution. If the Shea is strong enough to run the country then let them do it. If they are not and a civil war inevitable we muct be out of it still.
2007-03-08 07:07:16 · answer #7 · answered by WO LEE 4 · 3⤊ 3⤋
yeah, although I wish we could do it sooner. Americans have no place in the middle of a civil war. This gives the Iraqi Govt a year to get their sh*t together. If they still haven't gotten it together by then, they are on their own.
2007-03-08 07:13:03 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
That is a tough question.
Personally I don't think it is a good idea to set a timeline because essentially you are telling the terrorists a timeline that they can plan for.
Now, I certainly don't advocate our current policy either. We are clearly failing here. I don't why our leaders refuse to lead, they instead are simply either blindly leading us into a situation where more lives are lost, or cut and run with their tail betwen their legs.
A true leader or leaders would find a real solution. Believe me we have NOT seen true leadership from anyone on Washington on this.. Democrat or Republican.
2007-03-08 07:07:45 · answer #9 · answered by Snap 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
yes.. I mean, how long are we going to stay there?
That area may never be secure.. Should we continue to risk the lives, money, and reputaions of our citizens indefinatly?
I think Fall of 2008 gives the Iraqis pleanty of support.. If the government falls it was meant to fall...
2007-03-08 07:12:11 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋