2007-04-24 11:44:26 · 8 answers · asked by robert d 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
We started now we need to say and finish. It would be so stupid to pull out now, all the people we have lost would have died for no reason. We need to say and fight and let the people know that we aren't giving up on them. They deserve to have normal lives as all of us do. My husband just came home from a 7 month deployment over there and he said their lives are so horrible. You would not believe the way these people live, they never know who they can trust and who may want to harm them or their children. No one should have to live in that kind of fear their entire lives. So I believe that staying and doing all that we can do is exactly what we need to do!
2007-04-24 12:23:57 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Iraq had stability before we arrived, but it came at the price of dictatorship. Now our choices are instability with American presence or instability without American presence. I fear the only possible result is to let the civil war take place and a new dictator will be found to replace our failed attempt at democracy in an undemocratic land.
2007-04-24 18:59:29 · answer #2 · answered by Scotty 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
im not in the millatry but i do support the millatry and from what i have seen on line and in other outlets i think it would be a big mistake to pull out of the war you have to understand how the enemy would view that move the people who we are fighting at this point would most assuradly see that as week and as worthy of nothing more then absolute distruction they would gather their forces and then hit us with all they have inside and out till nothing was left we are commited and if we brake now we would be showing that we are devided and that would signal them all to hit harder not limp off anyone saying we have them by the nads is ether full of it or grossly missinformed when fighting you have to take the king like in chess you leave him out there and he will come back
2007-04-24 18:57:45 · answer #3 · answered by steel warrior 01 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
So they don't have stability-- it's not the choice for the USA to make for them, is it? They've lost more innocent civilians with us there, who tore apart their army and government, and have stayed to kill and rape the rest.
Frankly, Saddam may have not been a saint, but people were able to go to work and send their kids to school and not worry about a suicide bomber.
.
2007-04-24 18:51:10 · answer #4 · answered by twowords 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Iraz had stability before the U.S. intervened because their dictator kept a tight rein on things. This is not supporting Saddam Hussein, just observing the way things were, and now are.
2007-04-24 18:49:02 · answer #5 · answered by beez 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Iraq was better off before we unlawfully invaded them. They will be better off when we leave their country. We have no right to tell them how to set up their government. We don't understand their culture and have no business being there. We have bombed their country back to the stone age. Isn't that enough for you?
2007-04-24 18:48:11 · answer #6 · answered by lcmcpa 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No way, we need to stay in their until we have victory. If we pull out it will be like Vietnam when we pulled out of there alot of people would die.
2007-04-24 20:04:51 · answer #7 · answered by halobeast 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
pull out.....we dont need to be over there killing people
2007-04-24 18:48:36 · answer #8 · answered by j _j_83221 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋