I thought that that is the dumbest thing to think of. The even support telling the enemies about leaving. That must be the most retarded thing I've heard in a while. I'm not a republican or democrat but I can see that it will be a big waste of lives (even thought there are soldiers dying right now) if we just leave. Why not win instead? And why blame Bush on everything?
2007-04-03 16:03:33 · 21 answers · asked by siqded 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
My teacher talked about taking out the funding for Iraq from the news and everyone in my class were for it except me.
2007-04-03 16:08:22 · update #1
War does not take 1-7 years. It can last 20 or 50 years. Learn to be patient War is not something we win in an instant...
2007-04-03 16:09:51 · update #2
define "WIN"
2007-04-03 16:05:56 · answer #1 · answered by Unfrozen Caveman 6 · 2⤊ 4⤋
It's not just High School age kids that think this ..... it's many adults from all walks of life. The real belief is .... that we never should have gone into Iraq to depose Hussein. What you end up with may be worse than him in power. There were many advantages to letting him remain in power. He was not that popular in the region. He ruled with a strong hand --- which many realize is what the region requires. And ... the US would not have to support and engineer a new government or leader. This saves billions of dollars and many lives.
The questions are ... should we police the world ? Can we afford it ? Where else should we start ?
2007-04-03 16:09:30 · answer #2 · answered by burlingtony 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I am a former marine who served proudly for five years straight out of high school. I just got out not too long ago. I have experienced what it means to have good friends die in this war, so my opinion may be skewed but, I've earned the right to my opinion. The problem is that military force has never defeated an enemy by changing its ideology, only by destroying its will to fight. When an enemy wants to die as part of its ideology, you cannot kill them to change their mind. People need to think of the war on terror as a war that will never be won, only controlled. Much like the war on crime or the war on drugs or the war on poverty.
2007-04-03 16:18:25 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Then the people in your high school are smart. The war is unwinnable at this point.
It will be a bigger waste of lives to stay, what happened to personal responsibility? At what point are we going to stop holding the Iraqis hands?
Bush gets blamed because he IS the President.
If winning were possible it would have been done by now, Bush has had four years. This obviously just another thing to add to his long list of failures.
2007-04-03 16:08:06 · answer #4 · answered by Perplexed 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If we pull out now, all of the soldiers who have died, gave their lives for no reason. And 9/11 WILL happen again. And they pull funding for the war, and it will be Black Hawk Down all over again. And by the way, all these people who think we are losing this war need to stop listening to the liberal media.
2007-04-03 18:43:04 · answer #5 · answered by hollybear1280 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Just tell them that none of the soldiers with whom I serve in Iraq, to include myself, think that an arbitrary timeline is a good idea. A timeline is something you put on an exercise, not a war.
Also ask them if they support the troops, because they can't support the servicemen and not want us to do our job at the same time.
2007-04-03 16:08:37 · answer #6 · answered by DOOM 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You aren't experienced enough in the real world, it seems. Your teachers and classmates have it right. I have two children in the Army right now, and I want the U.S.out of Iraq. This is Viet Nam all over again - I am a veteran of that war, saw several dear friends die over there, for no good reason. I held two of them while they died in my arms. I curse the memory of the fools who sent them there with me. War is not a freakin' game, boy! Do you freakin' HEAR ME? Grow up!!!!
2007-04-03 16:17:50 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. It shows the political bent of the writers of kinfolk guy. actually that the backside 10% and the predominately detrimental fact has been uncovered as liberal BS. a normal seek will provide you the reality. by the way, I dropped out of highschool stunning after i began out twelfth grade. My SAT replaced into 1485 and my GPA replaced into 3.88. residing in Detroit replaced into too risky and that i needed a fashion out. i replaced into interior the backside 10% economically, yet I replaced that. My son is serving interior the militia and his SAT score replaced into 1570 and he has a school degree. i will declare from experience that the writers of kinfolk guy are packed with crap.
2016-10-20 23:21:07 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Marginal cost vs. Marginal benefit. At some point, the cost of staying (lost lives and money) outweigh the benefits of staying (security). Whether or not this point has been reached is a value judgment.
2007-04-03 16:07:15 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Just keep your nose in the History books son, when you get to the part (which your teachers will not teach) about US Imperialism in the world, then you will understand why this occupation, capitalist murder scheme and plundering should end immediately.
2007-04-03 16:09:42 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Ever hear of a lose/lose scenereo ?
Just for the sake of arguement, we do win, what form would such a victory take?
2007-04-03 16:08:52 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋