English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I believe they went into Iraq with good faith at the time due to the 9/11 attack. However, no WMD's were discovered but we did unseat a tyrant and then.... There was no upfront homework done and they listened to a shrewd Shi'a character paint a rosy picture of our welcome which never transpired. We cannot change the current situation without hundreds of thousands of troops and it is not going to happen so, let's save our Billions

The outcome, although we got right through to Bahgdad, has been a disaster and Bush should concede and use all this hue and cry to get out -- why won't he?

2007-04-27 05:57:52 · 5 answers · asked by Frank OH 1 in Politics & Government Military

5 answers

The Moranthau Plan and De-Nazification immediately come to mind.

2007-04-27 06:04:24 · answer #1 · answered by A Balrog of Morgoth 4 · 0 0

You apparently think the news tells you everything. They cover ever soldier's death, and vaguely cover Iraqi civilian casualties, but you never ask the critical questions.

If the insurgents really are only upset about our presence, why are the bombings obviously targeted toward Iraqis? Given that the death rates are about 20 to 1, either the insurgents are totally incompetent, or they aren't targetting us.

Just what are our soldiers doing over there when they aren't being shot at? Do you know? Have a guess? Does the media even ask the question, let alone answer it?

Is it just possible that the President knows something about the situation that you don't? Think carefully before you answer, because it's obvious that there's a lot about it that you simply don't even guess, let alone know.

2007-04-27 06:07:28 · answer #2 · answered by open4one 7 · 0 0

Bush is desparate to salvage what is left of his reputation.

Typically, presidents facing the end of their term in office get very concerned about their place in history.

The Great Decider does not want to be remembered as the failure that he is. Watch for him to try to keep his Iraq disaster going until he leaves office.

Then when the inevitable withdrawal takes place he will be able to blame it on his successor.

Finally comes the presidential library. Boot-licking sycophants will build a museum of inspiring memories of the brave war hero of the Texas National Guard who almost went to 'Nam and would surely have downed a lot of enemy fighter craft, even if those cowardly liberals keep pointing out that he never left US soil and that no member of the large Bush family put on a uniform and went to Iraq.

2007-04-27 06:09:35 · answer #3 · answered by fra59e 4 · 1 0

It's a horrible comparison, considering there was virtually no resistance at all in either europe or japan following surrender.

2007-04-27 06:03:15 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Yes you should try to ask an intelligent question.

2007-04-27 06:02:42 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers