Do you think the time-line the Democrats proposed is FAIR (or safe) for our troops?

Answer 1

No it isnt fair. Dems are on the war path, trying to clear the way for Hillary. I find it pretty sad, they are basically saying our troops are wasting their time, and fighting for nothing. Ask the troops and the Iraqis, the would think different. Not for nothing, we are helping to liberate and free Iraq. Isnt that the same thing everyone is demaning we do in Darfur? Didnt Saddam do the same thing to his people? Make up your minds folks!

Answer 2

Those that leave will be safe.
There is a concern though.
Once the troops leave, are the Iraqi troops capable and equiped enough to handle the sectarian violence?

The enemies are difficult to identify; they are not the usual enemies in which you can shoot on sight.
That's the real problem with this war.
You can't win.
They are prepared to die and bring others with them.

As the troops leave, a civil war will break out in Iraq and the poor Iraqis there will have to bear the consequences.
But they have to fend for themselves.

Answer 3

The war was only supposed to take a few months, and it's lasted longer than World War II. Giving the Iraqis as much as another 18 months to get their act together is more than FAIR to the Iraqis.

Is it FAIR to our troops to put them in the middle of situations such as this.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/28/AR2007032800166.html

Which side should our soldiers be on

Answer 4

The timeline is misunderstood by many. The 2008 date is the date by which Congress wants to see the BEGINNING of a withdrawal of combat troops from Iraq. So yes, I think it's both fair and safe. It gives them over a year to wind down their combat.

Answer 5

As the whole world tried to tell that freak over 4 years ago, it was neither fair nor safe to send them in the first place.

It was especially unfair to send people who had signed up to defend U.S. soil across the world to destroy a country that had not threatened us in any way, just to make Bush feel he has a big wee-wee, and to enrich Cheney's buddies (and Cheney himself, no doubt).

What was both unfair and unsafe was the series of wrongs Bush ordered -- slaughtering and kidnapping and torturing civilian non-combatants; putting liars, thieves, and murderers in charge of the country; endangering our people and the Iraqi's by firing the army and splintering the country; putting the resources of the country in the hands of thieves.

The myriad of wrongs those criminals committed can't be undone (the hundreds of thousands of dead made living, the tortured and raped unharmed, etc.).

But at least we can stop committing mass-murder and other crimes.

Staying the wrong course is both unfair and unsafe.

Answer 6

Yep, it gives the Iraqis a year to get their sh*t together. The Dems could have cut off funding and the war would end immediately. The only other option is an open-ended war, which the majority of the American people are not in favor of.

Answer 7

I agree a timeline is good. I also think said timeline should be top secret infomation. In no way should these insurgence know when that is or what it entails. The element of surprize is paramount in this situation. So, in way, Bush and the democrats are wrong.

Answer 8

I think they are taking too long myself. Something, is always better than staying the course for nothing. So yes, its safer and fairer than the current path to nowhere.

Answer 9

It is hard to determine what the enemy's immediate reaction would be, so I can't answer my opinion on the safety to our troops.

I do believe however, that any withdrawal prior to the Iraqi government being fully prepared is short sighted and ignorant.

Answer 10

No time line is fair...however, I believe we were going to start our withdraw in 2008 anyway, we just weren't going to announce it!