The Liberals want nothing more than for us to leave the Middle East (prior to suceeding) because they know the consequences of that decision would be horrific. The lib's can then blame the fallout on Bush, though they whined and cried to end the War. Liberals spin EVERYTHING.
2007-03-18 06:54:09
·
answer #1
·
answered by Terrie 3
·
1⤊
2⤋
Is this really a question or do you just want to state your views?
I don't know where you are getting your information.
First of all, the situation in Iraq is unwinnable. Now it is primarily an issue of damage control.
In fact, most Iraqis DON'T want the US in their country. This has been widely proven in polls and observed in various news outlets. Our invasion, instead of bringing democracy, toppled their existing government and created a power vacuum that has escalated into a civil war. Over a hundred thousand Iraqi civilians have been killed, and a vast majority of them were innocent people. More terrorists are in Iraq now than there were before the invasion. Each time we bomb an Iraqi school or torture people in secret prisons, normal civilians turn against the US. Our mistakes are only helping terrorist recruitment. If anything, the invasion of Iraq has made the US less safe from terrorist and the Iraqis are even further from democracy.
2007-03-18 07:00:13
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
that is a good purchase while in comparison with an risky area would desire to we withdraw too straight away. We gripe approximately $4 gas, yet what if it have been only no longer attainable at any cost? evaluate that Iraq is majority Shia, and the different majority Shia usa interior the area, Iran, has tried to close the Strait of Hormuz earlier. And if concern unfold to UAE and Saudi Arabia, heaven help us! Mr. Bush's gamble is a huge one, with the two a marvelous or a adverse effect having immeasurable impression. The stakes are so intense that folding the hand while the probabilities are high finding greater advantageous only would not make experience.
2016-10-01 03:06:13
·
answer #3
·
answered by carol 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Until we win what exactly?
We're making terrorist faster than we are killing them.
First though, the "bad news" for imperialists is that 71% of Iraqis want US-led forces to withdraw within a year, and 61% approve of resistance attacks against US forces. If US-led forces were to withdraw within the next 6 months, 58% of Iraqis believe this would lead to a fall in inter-ethnic violence, and 61% believe there would be an improvement in improve day-to-day security
For the full report see the link below
2007-03-18 06:58:18
·
answer #4
·
answered by Black Dragon 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
This is more of a question... How does a country acheive "freedom" while being occupied by a foreign army? At what point would you surrender to the Chinese if they invaded, killed all your leaders, destroyed your infrastructure, and killed a million of your neighbors.
. Does "winning " in Iraq mean waiting for that type of surrender? Do you think that might happen in your lifetime?
Do you think that "brung" is really a word?
2007-03-18 06:59:55
·
answer #5
·
answered by commandercody70 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
You mean the United States not America.
Not the same thing, you see while everybody in America from Nome to Patagonia, from Easter Island to Greenland is an American, not every United Statesian is an American. For instance, Hawaiians are as United Statesians as they come, but they ARE NOT Americans, they are Pacific Islanders.
That said, I agree as United Statesians we MUST stay in Iraq until things have settled down and that is a stable nation. Not doing so will spell disaster in many many ways. We should have never gone in there, but now that we are in there we can't leave and leave a mess behind. Doing that will come back to bite us were the sun never shines.
Hope that helps.
2007-03-18 06:49:59
·
answer #6
·
answered by r1b1c* 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Exactly how do you define"winning"?
Bush keeps telling us we're not fighting any country,but nebulous terrorists without a state to defeat.
So if we're not fighting Iraq,what is the definition of winning the war there if we're not fighting Iraq,but people who are not part of the State of Iraq?
2007-03-18 07:05:47
·
answer #7
·
answered by Zapatta McFrench 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
First of all the majority of Iraqi's don't want us there. I don't know where you got the information for the statement that they do. Secondly the solution to winning in Iraq is a diplomatic one not a military one. Ask General Petreaus he will tell you the same thing.
2007-03-18 06:56:12
·
answer #8
·
answered by mrlebowski99 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
Iraqis win a democracy when the foreign military quits occupying its' land; terrorizing it's citizens and stealing its' natural resources.
Get real dude.
2007-03-18 06:52:13
·
answer #9
·
answered by andy r 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
When you say WE need to stay in Iraq you mean OTHER PEOPLE not YOU specifically RIGHT???
HERE IS THE LIST OF BRAVE REPUBLICANS WHO PROUDLY BELIEVE IN SENDING OTHERS TO DIE FOR BUSH'S LIES IN IRAQ:
* Dick Cheney: did not serve. Several deferments, the last by marriage.
* Dennis Hastert: did not serve.
* Tom Delay: did not serve.
* Roy Blunt: did not serve.
* Bill Frist: did not serve.
* Mitch McConnell: did not serve.
* Rick Santorum: did not serve.
* Trent Lott: did not serve.
* John Ashcroft: did not serve. Seven deferments to teach business.
* Jeb Bush: did not serve.
* Karl Rove: did not serve.
* Saxby Chambliss: did not serve. "Bad knee." The man who attacked> Max
Cleland's patriotism.
* Paul Wolfowitz: did not serve.
* Vin Weber: did not serve.
* Richard Perle: did not serve.
* Douglas Feith: did not serve.
* Eliot Abrams: did not serve.
* Richard Shelby: did not serve.
* Jon! Kyl: did not serve.
* Tim Hutchison: did not serve.
* Christopher Cox: did not serve.
* Newt Gingrich: did not serve.
* Don Rumsfeld: served in Navy (1954-57) as flight instructor.
* George W. Bush: failed to complete his six-year National Guard; got
assigned to Alabama so he could campaign for family friend running for U.S. Senate; failed to show up for required medical exam, disappeared from duty.
* Ronald Reagan: due to poor eyesight, served in a non-combat role making movies.
* B-1 Bob Dornan: Consciously enlisted after fighting was over in Korea.
* Phil Gramm: did not serve.
* Dana Rohrabacher: did not serve.
* John M. McHugh: did not serve.
* JC Watts: did not serve.
* Jack Kemp: did not serve. "Knee problem," although continued in NFL
for 8 years.
* Dan Quayle: Journalism unit of the Indiana National Guard.
* Rudy Giuliani: did not serve.
* George Pataki: did not serve.
* Spencer Abraham: did not serve.
* John Engler: did not serve.
* Lindsey Graham: National Guard lawyer.
* Arnold Schwarzenegger: AWOL from Austrian army base.
Pundits & Preachers
* Sean Hannity: did not serve.
* Rush Limbaugh: did not serve (4-F with an 'anal cyst.')
* Bill O'Reilly: did not serve.
* Michael Savage: did not serve.
* George Will: did not serve.
* Chris Matthews: did not serve.
* Paul Gigot: did not serve.
* Bill Bennett: did not serve.
* Pat Buchanan: did not serve.
* John Wayne: did not serve.
* Bill Kristol: did not serve.
* Kenneth Starr: did not serve.
* Antonin Scalia: did not serve.
* Clarence Thomas: did not serve.
* Ralph Reed: did not serve.
* Michael Medved: did not serve.
* Charlie Daniels: did not serve.
2007-03-18 07:25:03
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋