We can leave now with 3,250 troops dead and "Lose" the war to the insurgents and eat crow "OR" Leave in 10 years with 50,000 troops dead and lose the war to the insurgents and eat a double decker of Crow......It's the USA choice.
2007-03-24 17:09:15 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
YOU BET IT IS
2007-03-24 17:18:18 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
How many American civilians dead in the second scenario?
After all, we won't simply be "eating crow", we'll have a HUGE target on our backs.
By the way, we won't have 50,000 troops dead in ten more years... if things continue as they have, it will be more like 10,000 which will still be less than 10%. Nice try with the numbers though.
2007-03-25 01:24:04 · answer #2 · answered by fredonia 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Weigh that against leaving now and giving up on the huge amount of oil that comes out of that area, because that is what is gonna happen. Civil war, halt on oil, possible destruction of oil.....
We should come up with good alternative fuel first, but thats hard to do when funding is being diverted to occupation.
We leave now and gas goes up to 5 a gallon, maybe more
Disastrous for the economy, especially after coming out of a war.
War is more that casualties and who won what.
what does eat crow mean?
2007-03-25 00:15:55 · answer #3 · answered by Alex H 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Here is what I see, I see we have won the war, take out WMD's, we didn't find any = win. Take out Saddam, mission accomplished, Saddam hanged = win, establish a democratic government, mission accomplished = win. Now we are in the middle of a civil war. Iraqi's are dieing by the score, every day. We can not win their civil war. We cannot take sides because they both (Shite, Sunni) hate us, and want us to leave. I say we bring our people home to guard our own borders, we are very vulnerable at this time, because we are over there.
2007-03-25 00:16:53 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
duh? lose now and save 46,750 soldiers? that's a no brainer. We didn't lose either, we followed a loser or losers into it, who didn't have a good plan to address the worst case scenarios that inevitably would crop up when your dealing with ancient tribes or sects that have been fighting each other forever and a day now. AND WE LET THE INSURGENTS IN, IN ORDER TO CAUSE TROUBLE SO WE WOULD HAVE TO STAY LONG ENOUGH TO GET THE BASES BUILT SO WE CAN STEAL THEIR OIL.
2007-03-25 00:21:07 · answer #5 · answered by mark [mjimih] 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
The correct choice is to send you there.
I bet a fake like you is too scared to go.
2007-03-25 00:55:36 · answer #6 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Stay, we wont lose 50 grand i'm sure. But we will lose guys, but giving up and tucking tail and running is only gonna show weakness, i dont want another 9-11.
2007-03-25 00:13:33 · answer #7 · answered by jcfchamp06 2 · 4⤊ 2⤋
We have to find a diplomatic solution while the army buys time.
2007-03-25 00:13:05 · answer #8 · answered by eric l 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Or, you could shut your damn mouth, and actually contribute something to society. Must feel bad that you were such a reject in the military, how was the blanket party wuss?
2007-03-25 00:13:25 · answer #9 · answered by J S 4 · 4⤊ 2⤋