English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I think it's a big mistake to try and pass legislation to bring troops home fro Iraq before we've succeeded in protecting them from a ruinous government that was in place before this whole mess started. If I were in power, I know what I would do. How come Hillary didn't ask this question, since the democrats have been maligning President Bush for 6 and a half years over it?

2007-03-21 23:34:53 · 30 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

30 answers

I am in Iraq and believe me a lot of women and children will be murdered 5 minutes after we are gone! Already the insugents are telling them they will be killed. We hand out small toys as gifts to the children. The insugents said any child caught with an American Toy will be butchered! Now the toys we gave out are tossed to the street by a people scared to death by the Liberals in Congress!

2007-03-21 23:41:18 · answer #1 · answered by ThorGirl 4 · 14 3

You have with other questions answered this question. The Dems are not in this for what is good for the people of Iraq or the mission that they seemed at one time to vote for overwhelmingly. But now they see blood in the water and would rather make the easy choice of going for power and cutting and running than really protecting this country's long term interest. No matter what some want to believe we can not just say "why can't we just all get along" and have the radical Islamists run to hug us and embrace our live styles. If it was just about Iraq or Israel to them then why are the same groups killing in Africa, Asia and the Pacific. They do want to dominate the war again and the US is the last super power and the only one that can stop them.

2007-03-22 06:03:54 · answer #2 · answered by ALASPADA 6 · 1 0

The Americans, instead of realizing that this is as bad as World War Two, or even worse, are going to pull out of Iraq, handing it over to Iran on a silver platter. Next may come the Saudis and the rest of the Gulf states. When dirty bombs go off all over Western towns, who is going to stop the Iranians?..

I think Hizbullah will attack again as soon as they are fully re-equipped and I think it will be during the summer, while Israel is still in a military and political turmoil. This time you will have to destroy Hizbullah no matter what the cost may be…

I think there are two ways to avoid this Armageddon. One can be a major war which the West can win… Eventually, the West will have to tackle the Iranians, it is better that they do it now to avert a world catastrophe later. With Iran defeated the Islamic onslaught will lose its base, and it may be the turning point in history to defeat the menace of extreme Islam. The majority of the Moslems don’t want this confrontation anyway…

Alternatively, all the West has to do is follow Putin’s ways. He assassinates his enemies without blinking an eye. Assassinate the four or five Mullahs who run the show, Ahmadinejad and a few more Iranian fanatics, and the War can be avoided. It may be difficult to do, but not impossible. With today’s hi-tech technology I am sure that new weapons against individuals are being prepared right now. I think it would be a better way of handling the matter than an all-out war against Islam.”

Source: http://sokol-blog.com/

2007-03-22 03:45:02 · answer #3 · answered by Ivri_Anokhi 6 · 4 0

If we pull out now and the whole region becomes one huge void Iran will probably become the controlling power at that time. Now if that happens we will lose control over the Strait of Hormuz and it will become mined and covered by rockets capable of sinking ships 20 miles away.
When this happens what do you think will happen to our gas prices then can you afford 7 to 10. dollars a gallon for gas or heating oil. So jump up and down to get our troops and see what happens in the long run.
Then you will here the sounds of the silent masses and congress and the senate will listen

2007-03-22 00:15:55 · answer #4 · answered by ULTRA150 5 · 5 0

Who besides you...??? Most of America. Just because the few who want to cut and run are the most vocal don't be fooled. Why do you think the democrats don't want to even bring the issue to a vote? They are trying to keep a lid on their extremist left wing base. If the democrats were to ever become foolish enough to cut the funding for this war they would be swept from office in an angry American tsunami the likes of which has never been seen before. Believe me, they know that . All this nonsense you are hearing is just to appease the far leftists in the base.

Those extreme leftists will have to decide if they are willing to accept the democrats with the war still being funded or if they want the republicans to win. We will see.



.

2007-03-22 00:06:52 · answer #5 · answered by Jacob W 7 · 6 1

It is not as if this were a theoretical question. We KNOW what happens when a power vacuum occurs. When the US pulled out of SE Asia, millions, not hundreds, but millions of people died. In the Cambodian "Killing Fields" about 1,700,000 people were executed. Did you ever fly on a Boeing 747? It holds less than 500 people. I make that to be 34,000 B-747s full of people being killed. One B-747 crashes and the news media is all over it for weeks, but let communists murder all those innocent people and you hardly hear a murmur.
I find it absolutely incredible that American politicians would trade human lives for votes. Not to mention, the people that would vote for someone so morally bankrupt!

2007-03-22 01:46:56 · answer #6 · answered by plezurgui 6 · 3 0

Consider this if we give up so easily then we deserve whatever the future brings I personally am disgusted at the ease with which we are loosing our stomach to finish this. Look at the past and find any war which wasn't painful or difficult it's sad that over 3000 have perished but that number was lost in hours in previous wars I fear we are slowly becoming a nation of wimps, whiners and baby's harden up America.

2007-03-21 23:52:36 · answer #7 · answered by Jerry 1 · 7 0

I agree with you . We promised to be there for the long-haul and so we shall !! Not forever, but certainly long enough to help them establish their own military and police forces .

And Hillary's question is very leading and presumptuous . . . . . she's asking what 'we' can do about global warming. . . assuming that 'we' can do anything at all . Even though thousands of scientists have now come forward and declared that mankind has nothing to do with global warming .

And THAT is how the Left Lies, Twists, and Spins every word and event known by mankind !!

2007-03-22 00:03:54 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 6 0

Shawn he in all risk has a non attempt against appropriate interest at the same time with working in a scientific institution or fixing trucks. i am going over there in some weeks on a scientific project. there are a number of our men nevertheless there doing extremely some jobs like this.

2016-10-01 07:51:36 · answer #9 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

It would be a HUGE mistake. The Democrats just want to bash Bush. They don't care about the consequences.

2007-03-22 06:32:48 · answer #10 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 2 0

For those of you who believe we should take our toys and go home. First, it doesn’t really matter why we went to Iraq in the first place. Personally, I am firmly convinced that Saddam DID HAVE a WMD program and weapons. What happened to the weapons, who knows? The russkies had plenty of reasons to help Saddam hide them, as did the French. Both were in bed with saddam on the political and supplier levels. The last thing they wanted was for the coalition to go in and seize a gob of banned weapons with “Made in USSR” stamped all over them. Most likely they were moved to Syria. Bassar A$$wipe was more than happy to take them off Saddams hands for “safekeeping”. No matter what, we have eliminated a Hitler wannabe from the face of the earth, and how anyone can argue with that is beyond me.

As to the consequences of packing up and leaving the job unfinished now, those who are advocating that action are putting political points against human suffering AND our national security. Forget for a moment the sunnis who somehow want to pull saddam’s rotting corpse out of the grave and prop him up on a balcony with a mechanical pole waving his arm up and down. They would disappear shortly after we left. The Shiites would have them for lunch. They would be instantly “advised” by Iran on how to pay back the old baathists running the sunni insurgency. Overwhelming force would own the day, and they would not have the same rules on engagement that cripple our troops. There would be no more so-called insurgency because they would be no more sunnis. That leaves Iraq as a satellite state of a greater Iran. You then have ahmaweeniejob in control of Iraq’s oil reserves. Whatever your argument about foreign oil dependency, the fact is that oil is a world commodity and “big oil” has much less control over the price than does people like Chavez and ahmaweeniejob. And remember, they are best buds. Both would not hesitate to manipulate the world oil price to gravely harm specifically the United States and other western economies.

So is it about “oil”? Maybe, but not for the usual “big greedy oil companies” profit motives that the socialist leftists in the democrat party harp on. ITS ABOUT WESTERN ECONOMIES, and our ability to provide our citizens with food, housing, jobs, healthcare, and most importantly, FREEDOM. And with western society in the throes of a worldwide economic depression, ISLAMOFASCISM WILL ADVANCE! Thet is the goal of Iran. Period. Ahmaweeniejob believes he is the one to bring militant islam to world dominance, and he will eventually have the means to do it once the nuclear Persian genie is out of the bottle. Do we have more than enough nuclear firepower to overwhelm him if he nukes a US city? What does it matter. He doesn’t care. Nuke all of Iran. In his eyes, death means virgins for the taking. And we will be left with millions of dead and injured Americans, a destroyed economy (look what happened after two towers and 3000 civilians, then imagine NYC or Chicago gone.

As to if they will follow us here, why not? They have come here before. And with Iraq no longer the islamofascist magnet drawing all the cross-dressing jihadiis hoping to go out in blazing glory with a bomb belt under a burqa, and with no more Americans to attack over there, they will be volunteering in droves to sneak in to the US. Even the small fry will be able to do damage. A lone jihadist who is sent here simply with instructions to have contact with no one (so no chance of signals intercept to alert us) could make a homemade bomb and attack a mall, subway, etc. When we start seeing attacks like this all around the country, the economy will tank also. And the libs think the Patriot act was bad, just wait.

Keep them busy over there, and start building bases close to the eastern border. We’re gonna need them. We WILL eventually have to clean up jimmy carter’s mess in Iran. It should have been done in 1980. It will be there until we finish it off. You cannot make peace with Islamofascism. They only see peace agreements as a pause to re-arm in their never-ending effort to bring islam to the world, by force or by outbreeding us. I do not want my descendents to live under a world islamist society. It is a backwards evil cult and eventually it will come down to us or them. I prefer to fight them while we still have the advantage. The door is closing on that one.

Hillary knows this but would never admit it. I wonder how she would look in a burqa? Well, actually, that would be a good thing.

2007-03-22 03:12:46 · answer #11 · answered by boonietech 5 · 3 0

fedest.com, questions and answers