If we leave now, it tells the entire Muslim world we can be beaten. Osama decided to attack us after seeing us run from Somalia. We must stay the course, or else we will be sure to face millions of angry Muslims who concider us weak. I'll be joining the Marines this November.
2007-03-26 20:26:12
·
answer #1
·
answered by Pearl Jam 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
The problem is that we had an extremely unrealistic expectation when we first went into Iraq. The war planning was based on best case scenarios which never work in the real-world. Simply getting rid of Saddam did not really accomplish much. The terrorist did not set down their weapons and run away in fear because of the "shock and awe" bombardment. This just shows how little we understand the enemy. Conventional military forces are most effective against other conventional military forces; not terrorists. It also seems that we have never had an exit strategy.
Compared to past wars, the war in Iraq has had very few casualties. If you doubt this claim, go check out the history of WW I & II, Korea, Vietnam. We should not leave Iraq simply because our soldiers are dying. Unfortunately, that is a risk of being in the military. I was medically discharged from the Army, so I accepted this risk in the past.
To do what the US initially set out to do could not be accomplished in 5 or 6 years. To recruit and train a military and police force to be able to handle the job on their own would normally take several decades. What has been accomplished in 5 to 6 years has been amazing, but the average person does not understand this reality. We should leave Iraq as soon as possible; however, a premature withdrawal is a mistake.
We never should have gone into Iraq to begin with. Without thinking clearly and gathering our own intelligence, we went there to make an example out of Saddam for the rest of the world to see. I would love to see us leave Iraq, but we are there and need to finish the job. If I was an Iraqi, and the US came and threw my country into chaos and then just left, I would be extremely angry. We must do everything in our power to set the situation right again; otherwise, our country's ideals are worthless. Our troops will have died in vain...
2007-03-27 04:03:42
·
answer #2
·
answered by Darin P 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
I believe when the government is stabilized we should withdraw, the job will be complete. This is not something that you can put on a calendar. Setting a withdrawal date is pure lunacy and is being done for the anti-war voters, sort of payback for electing a socialist majority in congress.
That country is going to have problems for years to come but at least we are going to give them a chance at having what we have, freedom.
57% of Americans agreed when asked “I support finishing the job in Iraq, that is, keeping the troops there until the Iraqi government can maintain control and provide security for their people.” Nowhere does that state Fall of 2008. Where does the socialists in congress come up with their lies.
2007-03-28 14:43:25
·
answer #3
·
answered by rmagedon 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
There is no reason for us to be there now. Cracking down on the insurgency does nothing towards promoting democracy in Iraq. In fact it actually oppresses democracy.
Our country emulates democracy from time to time. At this juncture in time we do not really have it. When there is a minority group dictating that they made mistakes and will continue down that path, until we are told what to believe. Even if it goes against everything we have stood for. That minority group has been promoting the misunderstanding that plebian citizenry do not have the right of say. It was the slaves in the original republics that did not have a say.
2007-03-27 03:36:13
·
answer #4
·
answered by eks_spurt 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
No. We need to go in there with about a hundred thousand troops and sit our big powerful butts down in the middle of their country, and take it! by Force.
* Either do it and get out or, we never should have gone there in the first place.*
If it's not worth doing right, it's not worth doing at all.(ex-military brat).
Leaving is an admission of defeat in the eyes of the Muslim fanatics, and will promote further more brutal violence on the Iraqi people when we're gone than ever before as well as invite them to visit our fair land in order to continue the conflict they are not willing to surrender.
2007-03-27 03:40:06
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think its wrong now that Iran is becoming more agressive.
COngress does not know all that is going on in the military. THe secrets are meant for the President and the generals.
If Iran was willing to join the greater international society and took a less agressive approach, I might not oppose it.
2007-03-27 03:22:22
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I would like to say "Yes: stay the distance." But we are talking about a turbulent nation in the Middle East which has been turbulent from ancient times. I fear there is nothing our troops can do to bring stability there... not in the long run. It wa good to have rid the world of Saddam; but there is no point in continued US presence there. Let's get out!
2007-03-27 03:21:21
·
answer #7
·
answered by Phoebhart 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
Out with the infidels...
Let peace reign...
See also:
2007-03-27 03:19:20
·
answer #8
·
answered by CLUELESS IN SEATTLE-JANE 2
·
0⤊
3⤋