Because that would be stupid.
2007-04-06 11:54:36
·
answer #1
·
answered by Frank 4
·
3⤊
1⤋
no offense but i think a lot of people that read this will say that your the fool in this thing. "nature taking its course" isn't really an option since if we leave they will just come right back to doing the same thing as before we went into war. We are taking the lead there and taking us out will just make things worse.
And just so you know..instead of trying to make your opinion known..why don't you check with the people that are actually fighting first. Talk to the soldiers that are there fighting for our freedom. Talk to them about the things they see and the things they do. The media makes Iraq look like all it is, is death and and that nothing good ever happens. I wish they would show the good things that happen in iraq and instead of showing the deaths of soldiers everyday...show the accomplishments we make.
This isn't just some random "fool" trying to make her point. I have seen up close and personal what being in iraq can do to someone because my brother has been there 3 times. He has told me many times that he doesn't want to leave until the job is done. What will we have accomplished if we just pull the troops out before the job is finished??? We will have just lost soldiers for no reason, we would have fought for absolutly nothing. My husband is actually excited about having his chance to go to iraq in september because he will have the opportunity to go and help his fellow brothers and sisters in this fight for freedom.
Before people that know nothing about the war try to make assumptions..maybe you should talk to the soldiers to get the real facts of what goes on in there day to day tolls.
2007-04-06 19:48:06
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
End of your story, certainly. This will be my last post for the day, solely because such a patently ridiulous non-Question is probably a signal from higher powers that I need a long, long, coffee break.
If ther are any fools here, you are the first and foremost of them. Here's why:
(1) Leaving Iraq and Afghanistan now creates two HUGE power vacuums in the Middle East and Central Asia, respectively. The Middle East will implode between a collision of various forces:
(a) Iranians exporting the Islamic Revolution, and asserting regional hegemony through proxies such as Hizballah, and direct action.
(b) Arab monarchies and dictatorships striking back, funding proxies such as the various Salafist movements (to keep them busy and away from their home turf) and Baath-oriented, pan-Arabist groups.
(c) Kurds trying to strike out on their own and find security at last for their 25 million stateless people, through American auspices, or through force of arms if not.
(d) Arabs, Turks, Iranians, and Syrians trying to keep the Kurds from having a state and taking chunks out of their territory and oil wealth.
(e) Salafists who hate all of the above and will fight everyone tooth and nail to assert and create a pan-Islamic Caliphate that will eventually restore the "old" borders - which include big chunks of Europe.
The region will produce far more than the 2 million Iraqi refugees it has at the moment if it implodes. You can kiss steady petroleum supplies goodbye, and watch the global economy sink. Terror movements such as Hizballah and Hamas will have ascendancy because the states that sponsor them will invest far more into their favorites so they win.
Never mind Afghanistan returning to its position as the premier supplier of heroin to the world, and the effect that has on Europe and North America. Did I mention what narcodollars do to the global economy yet? Did I mention that the creation of something like "The Islamic Republic of Iraq" - an Al Qaeda dream-state centered on central Iraq is more or less a guarantee that those "ragtag camel jockeys" some people find comical will ensure they become much more organized as a state, with all the attendant benefits of trade, taxation, and unlimited recruitment for military purposes?
So instead of having just one group, Hizballah with it FOUR divisions worth of troops sponsored by Iran, we have a multiplicity of various terror groups that move upwards from IEDs, VBIEDs, and small arms to mobile missile launchers, attack helicopters, and rocket artillery.
Yep, thank you for your suggestion we leave the Middle East and Central Asia posthaste. If you have any other bright ideas, Questioner, feel free to drown yourself in a bucket.
2007-04-06 19:33:12
·
answer #3
·
answered by Nat 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Things that make you think a little:
There were 39 combat related killings in Iraq in January.
In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the
month of January. That's just one American city,
about as deadly as the entire war-torn country of Iraq .
When some claim that President Bush shouldn't
have started this war, state the following:
A. FDR led us into World War II.
B. Germany never attacked us; Japan did.
From 1941-1945, 450,000 lives were lost ..
an average of 112,500 per year.
C. Truman finished that war and started one in Korea .
North Korea never attacked us..
From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost ...
an average of 18,334 per year.
D John F. Kennedy started the Vietnam conflict in 1962.
Vietnam never attacked us.
E. Johnson turned Vietnam into a quagmire.
From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost ..
an average of 5,800 per year.
F. Clinton went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent.
Bosnia never attacked us.
He was offered Osama bin Laden's head on a platter three
times by Sudan and did nothing. Osama has attacked us on
multiple occasions.
G. In the years since terrorists attacked us , President Bush
has liberated two countries, crushed the Taliban, crippled
al-Qaida, put nuclear inspectors in Libya , Iran , and, North
Korea without firing a shot, and captured a terrorist who
slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.
The Democrats are complaining
about how long the war is taking.
But
It took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno
to take the Branch Davidian compound.
That was a 51-day operation..
We've been looking for evidence for chemical weapons
in Iraq for less time than it took Hillary Clinton to find
the Rose Law Firm billing records.
It took less time for the 3rd Infantry Division and the
Marines to destroy the Medina Republican Guard
than it took Ted Kennedy to call the police after his
Oldsmobile sank at Chappaquiddick.
It took less time to take Iraq than it took
to count the votes in Florida !!!!
Our Commander-In-Chief is doing a GREAT JOB!
The Military morale is high!
The biased media hopes we are too ignorant
to realize the facts
But Wait
There's more!
JOHN GLENN (ON THE SENATE FLOOR)
Mon, 26 Jan 2004 11:13
Some people still don't understand why military personnel
do what they do for a living. This exchange between
Senators John Glenn and Senator Howard Metzenbaum
is worth reading. Not only is it a pretty impressive
impromptu speech, but it's also a good example of one
man's explanation of why men and women in the armed
services do what they do for a living.
This IS a typical, though sad, example of what
some who have never served think of the military.
Senator Metzenbaum (speaking to Senator Glenn):
"How can you run for Senate
when you've never held a real job?"
Senator Glenn (D-Ohio):
"I served 23 years in the United States Marine Corps.
I served through two wars. I flew 149 missions.
My plane was hit by anti-aircraft fire on 12 different
occasions. I was in the space program. It wasn't my
checkbook, Howard; it was my life on the line. It was
not a nine-to-five job, where I took time off to take the
daily cash receipts to the bank."
"I ask you to go with me ... as I went the other day...
to a veteran's hospital and look those men
with their mangled bodies . in the eye, and tell THEM
they didn't hold a job!
You go with me to the Space Program at NASA
and go, as I have gone, to the widows and Orphans
of Ed White, Gus Grissom and Roger Chaffee...
and you look those kids in the eye and tell them
that their DADS didn't hold a job.
You go with me on Memorial Day and you stand in
Arlington National Cemetery , where I have more friends
buried than I'd like to remember, and you watch
those waving flags.
You stand there, and you think about this nation,
and you tell ME that those people didn't have a job?
What about you?"
For those who don't remember ..
During W.W.II, Howard Metzenbaum was an attorney
representing the Communist Party in the USA .
Now he's a Senator!
If you can read this, thank a teacher.
If you are reading it in English thank a Veteran
2007-04-06 21:46:12
·
answer #4
·
answered by aase2002 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
if we let nature "takes its course" it's goning to stay a horrible place. You think everyone should shape up or die, how are we supposed to find every person who's some sort of terrorist. there is no way, the only thing the U.S can do now is keep the troops there and try to establish some sort of solid government.
2007-04-06 18:55:16
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
We should pull out and let them deal with it. And yes we would be ready here IF WE had spent that $400 Billion dollars on homeland defense and not Iraq. I read once that (I think $15B) would have paid for every recommendation of the 9/11 commission.
If Iraq gets another stupid government that makes threats to us, then go back and wipe out that government (that should take 4-6 weeks) Then pull out again and let them try again.
2007-04-06 19:05:30
·
answer #6
·
answered by AngryPatriot 3
·
1⤊
2⤋
I tend to agree. Next time, pick three cities, warn them thoroughly to evacuate, then bomb them to the ground. Tell them to either fix the problem by ousting their terrorists, or not. Their choice.
No more nation building. Period.
2007-04-06 18:57:54
·
answer #7
·
answered by mckenziecalhoun 7
·
1⤊
2⤋
Where is hell anyway? Gimme the address I am gonna Mapquest directions
2007-04-06 18:54:50
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
We can do that yes But you must know they WILL COME HERE AFTER US. we are not prepared to fight here, alot of americans will not fight , but give up and be beheaded and alot of us that will can get weapons , so what can we do. the lawyers wont let the army defend us.
2007-04-06 18:56:41
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
4⤋