later this year? 2008? 2009? In five or 10 years?
2007-03-20 19:31:39 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
WWII and the Iraq war are apples and oranges....in WWII all the chips were on the table....certainly not the case with Iraq now.
2007-03-20 19:45:42 · update #1
Pearl Harbor isn't WWII....Japan was a FAR greater threat to america than al-qaeda. We lost key battles to Japan versus obliterating al-qaeda without a draft or numerous resources.
2007-03-20 22:41:13 · update #2
I know all you Bush apologists think Saddam/Iraq had a connection with 9/11....but the senate intelligence committee ruled that out as well as the NIE.
9/11 has nothing to do with the Iraq war.
2007-03-20 22:46:55 · update #3
It will still be going on when he leaves office unless the American people get behind the democratic majority in the Senate and let them know that we want our solders to come home. At which time they can cut the funding and he will have no choice to abandon this war. We are not going to win militarily anyway it is going to have to be solved by the Iraqi people themselves. They will never accept a government set up by George Bush for his purpose and will continue to murder our people until we move out.
2007-03-20 19:51:22 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Why are you asking this question in yahoo? George Bush has answered this question more times than I can count, but nobody who hates him seems to understand anything about principles and freedom. During the first state of the union adress after the Sept. 11 attack by facist islamic jihadist he stated that this war would not be measured by body counts, and would be fought the world over. Yet the pacifist socialist on the nightly news can't run one broadcast without sounding like a bunch of cry babies, over the soljeirs maimed, or killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. They will not point out that illegal mexicans in the U.S.A. have murdered more people here on the homefront than all of the service men killed in Iraq. But I guess I will need to answer your question since you did not get it from Bush, when the Iraqi military is capable of taking care of Iraq we will leave. There is no set timetable on this, and will we keep on keeping on until we win or until some Democrat in power puts a date on the surrendering to terrorist thugs.
2007-03-20 20:16:41 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It won't unless sensible people in Iraq realize that they are the ones who can solve the problem. The country which is practically in civil will need a strong leader, a rallying point who can persuade his people to drop partisan and/or sectarian biases in order for the country to move forward. Bush strategy will not help in the long run.
That war should not have taken place at all. Four years after the invasion, the world is more dangerous than before.
2007-03-20 19:43:30 · answer #3 · answered by Del S 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
delight. It makes human beings swear they are suitable, yet even while incorrect, they can't exchange their approaches. delight is one in all of the seven deadly sins, and practiced interior the worst way under Bush. purely watch next time he supplies an straightforward arrogant answer to a press question. He lies. continuously. suitable on your face. The worst style of evil is while that is utilized via a stupid individual.
2016-10-19 05:46:04 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I will go with whats behind door number 3. all I have to say is Korea. we still have 30,000+ troops sitting on the DMZ over there for all of you who actually care. never once heard anyone complain that they have been there for over 50 years now and we loose over 50 people some years. the average is around 35 last I checked. that would add up to around 1750 since the war ended. I still can't hear any comments on it, so lets go to Europe, where we still have bases in more than one country that have thier own governments and armys to protect them. The war will be over some day but what's the difference, just like all the other times we will have to commit thousands of troops to supporting the country for decades to come. but what's the difference, no one ever cared about all the men and women around the world who die every year in the line of duty for all of these years, so why the hell do any of you care now.
2007-03-20 19:46:53 · answer #5 · answered by nyxcat1999 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
It won't be over. It's politics, Bush doesn't care how many lives he wrecks. Neither was it a war on terror. It's about the oil, so until all of the world's oil is channelled to his ranch in Texas, he won't be happy.
Even then, he'd find some other sadistic entertainment to keep himself preoccupied. Good riddance to bad rubbish...get him out of there!!!
2007-03-20 19:56:54 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The war will end when the US is bankrupt, or after Bush is replaced and someone decent decides to end it.
The real question is, would we have lost in Iraq had this war been waged by a competent administration?
2007-03-20 19:42:57 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Was the same question asked of Roosevelt during WWII?
10,000 Americans alone died in one day during the invasion of Normandy.
5,000 US Teenager die every year due to reckless driving. That means 20,000 US Teenagers have died since the war started, while 3,000+ US troops were killed during the same period.
Where is the outrage? Why no protests? Don't care about our teenagers?
More people died in 9-11 attacks than in Pearl Harbor, and Pearl Harbor deaths were mostly military. The US went to war over Pearl Harbor.
2007-03-20 19:37:12 · answer #8 · answered by ? 6 · 5⤊ 4⤋
Well Haliburton moved to Dubai which tells me they are surreptitiously beginning to pull the troops back towards the borders of Iraq. Bush is not so adamant about his "staying the course now"; he is too wrapped up in the scandals of his cabinet.
2007-03-20 19:38:13 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Don't pay much attension to the news lately? He changed his course and instituted a surge in Iraq per the Iraqi study group's recomendation.
Even worse for your arguement is the fact that it's working.
2007-03-20 19:35:02 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 4⤋