Is Harry Reid declaring "loss" in IRAQ putting our troops in danger?

Question

he should resign for those comments at once!

I see the KOOLAID drinking left loons are answering with their usual drivel. Figures.

Answer 1

His description is apt and is not putting our troops in danger. This boneheaded policy which is no longer called "stay the course" but a "surge" with no end date is doing that. Our troops are going over there with insufficient training and equipment.
Over 68 of them have died this month alone in Baghdad.
The IEDs put our troops in danger.
Old equipment puts our troops in danger
Having them in the middle of a conflict that has been in existence since 634 A.D. is what is putting them in danger.
An Iraqi government which supports militias who end up shooting our troops and then undercuts efforts by the military to tamp them down is putting our troops in danger.
The extension of their tours with fewer and fewer breaks is putting them in danger.
Stretching our military as thinly as it is now is putting them in danger

Answer 2

You know what, it doesn't make a damn bit of difference what Harry Reid or anybody else says about the situation in Iraq, good or bad. It is what it is. The insurgency needs no further "emboldening" - I'd say they're pretty damned bold as it is. John McCain went to Bagdhad and essentially said the opposite - that didn't change anything either. Our troops are already in danger and have been for three years. Why do people think that men and women who spend their time in a thankless exercise while getting shot at, bombed, etc. are too worried about what Harry Reid says. They can see what's going on ahell of a lot better than you can. They don't need anybody's help to define whether success is occuring or not - they're there and seeing it.

Answer 3

I guess those that fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
Iraq was and is winnable, the strategy needs some work, and all free thinking peoples MUST stand firm TOGETHER.
Europe wants no part of this war, as they seem to have lost their spines since WW2.
Divide and conquer...that is what the Iraqi insurgents have done with the US and their people. They've done it well, as now the US will consider withdrawing aft the next Presidiential election.
I saw this happen with Vietnam. The sight of sailors pushing choppers off aircraft carriers to make room for the Vietnamese made me wonder if the average Amercian had the stomach for a prolonged war. I guess you don't.
One thing....put a picture some poor starving kid up and we all (north Americans) get all guilty for not helping.
Then when we get get kicked in the teeth we won't kick back hard enought to do any good. We want to, but leftist attitudes that abound in all of us prevent it. "We don't want to hurt anyone" attitude.
Well let's hurt the ones that need it....insurgents etc. Don't worry, we in Canada have our left wing nimrods as well. The NDP is one of them, a foreign affairs critic wants to "reach out " to the Taliban....I'll reach out....with a 5.56 mm.
How's that for "reaching out"?

Answer 4

In a word, YES

Read up on 4th generation(asymetrical) warfare and see how bad the current issues are hurting the troops in the field and helping the Enemy.

I leave it to you judgement to see what is right once you have some facts from the military perspective.

Retired USAF SNCO

Answer 5

The democrats don't have the guts to cut off funding, because their afraid they won' get re-elected, so they have a need to under mind our troops, and endanger them with ridiculous statement's. It just gives our enemies more hope a strength. Imagine going on patrol, feeling that if you get wounded or die, It didn't matter because the majority leader of the senate says we've already lost the war? Way to go Harry.

Answer 6

As a soldier who's been to Iraq...
Harry Reid is an idiot for saying that we've "lost" in Iraq, however he is not endangering any troops by stating his opinion. What's endangering lives is us throwing money at the Iraqis that they pay the farmers to set up IEDs and the suicide bombers to take care of their families.

Answer 7

you think of the insurgents have not observed the coalition isn't precisely on top of problems with the region? that's top... They have been basically waiting for a U.S. Senator to tell them. they have have been given FOX information down there, you recognize. And all they are apprehensive approximately is the U.S. media. that's top. that is all approximately what YOU hear on T.V.

Answer 8

Well IF what Harry Reid says IS true why is he not pushing for the troops to be removed now? Why wait if all is lost?

Answer 9

No, sending our troops to Iraq without sufficient body armor and equipment, keeping them there for 15 months at a pop is putting them in danger.

(The day after dubya declared that not just passing the war funding bill was going to keep troops there longer, they announced the extended tours of duty - despite the fact that the troops are already funded through may).

Keeping our brave soldiers in the middle of an escalating civil war, and goading the enemy to 'bring it on' from the safety of the oval office is putting them in danger.

I agree about resigning at once, but it is Bush & Cheney who need to do it.

Answer 10

No, it makes them safer. If a loss is declared, and we, correspondingly leave, no more U.S. troop deaths in Iraq.

Why would it put the troops in danger? The "enemy" already knows that they're winning. They already know the vast majority of the U.S. public want to begin phased or immediate withdrawal. And they know that we have a stupid, stubborn president who will never do that (possibly even provoking a constitutional battle over it, if necessary). They're not going to start attacking us more....if anything, they might conserve their attacks now to wait until there are less U.S. troops so that they can continue with their own internal, civil war.