Unless we change the ROE, our political correctness and demand our politions come up with real solutions rather than political hate rehtoric and political ambisions, no.
2007-04-23 06:37:09
·
answer #1
·
answered by dglaze11 2
·
2⤊
1⤋
I'm not sure.
As far as democracy in Iraq is concerned. That will happen no matter what. We live in a representational era. Even Iran is an illiberal democracy. However, we need to make sure that whatever democracy arises works in our security interests. Islamic radicals are our biggest fight. We would be better off if Moutada Al Sadr doesn't come to power with some fundamentalist Iranian-backed agenda.
2007-04-23 13:59:37
·
answer #2
·
answered by origen01 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
America isn't interesting in "winning in Iraq". George Bush was ordered by the "powers that be behind-the-scenes" to attack Iraq for three incredibly lame reasons:
1) The Bush family had a personal vendetta against Saddam Hussein ever since Desert Storm when George H.W. Bush was ridiculed, criticized and humiliated for not "finishing the job" and ousting Hussein at that time;
2) Bush, Cheney and all their oil buddies want all that OIL swimming underneath Iraq's sands - at any cost of human life or property destruction, so they can richer and richer and richer feeding America's addiction on cheap, easily-accessible foreign OIL;
3) Ever since World War II, the giant U.S. military-industrial complex realized just how profitable 'war' could be. So they bought up all the politicians, hired pricey lobbyists, and formed special interest groups to promote and encourage more 'war'. Thus, the U.S. got involved the the Korean Conflict; the Cuban Missile Crisis; the Cold War; Vietnam and Desert Storm - all so companies like General Motors, Lockheed, McDonnell-Douglas, the Carlyle Group, and Halliburton could rake in billions of dollars, courtesy of the American taxpayers.
If we truly are in Iraq to "bring democracy" to that nation, and genuinely expect to leave Iraq anytime soon - WHY is the U.S.A. building the largest embassy in the world on a 104-acre site in downtown Baghdad overlooking the 'new' puppet Iraqi government installed by the Bush administration? Because we don't intend to leave that country until we've sucked every single drop of OIL from its sands. The U.S. will be there for decades, perhaps even generations - as long as there's OIL and PROFITS to be sucked up. -RKO- 04/23/07
2007-04-23 13:55:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by -RKO- 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
We have always been winning in Iraq, but ALAS, we are losing (like Vietnam) in the political and anti-war homefront!!!
2007-04-23 15:06:57
·
answer #4
·
answered by grizzlytrack 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
The Military has already won in Iraq, the Iraqi people have already won in Iraq, the fight against the insurgency is different and may not be won, as we may not there much longer!
2007-04-23 13:38:32
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
If we start fighting similarly to the way we did in WW2, we stand a chance. The way we are going now, there is none. Regardless of what we do, these people will continue to fight. It is a civil war that is none of our business. I hated Saddam, but you've got to admit that the guy knew how to keep his people in check.
2007-04-23 13:37:14
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Yes, unless gutless politicians snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory as they did in Viet Nam.
2007-04-23 14:46:54
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
A wishful thinking! Have you heard of Vietnam and the miserable defeat of Americans there?
2007-04-23 13:35:35
·
answer #8
·
answered by Sami V 7
·
0⤊
4⤋
What does "win" mean?
If you mean militarily, then the only answer is a resounding NO.
2007-04-23 13:35:30
·
answer #9
·
answered by ken erestu 6
·
0⤊
3⤋