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

What ever happened to the days when-
1. defeating a foreign army
2. capturing the capital city
3. deposing and eliminating the country's leader

Meant that you won? What do you think?

2007-05-05 17:08:45 · 17 answers · asked by johntindale 5 in Politics & Government Military

17 answers

I assume all those who have answered your question feel no loyalty or duty to the Iraqis who trusted & believed our assurances for their safety when they voted in the democratic goverment. Just because Saddam was hanged does not mean his terrorist organization disbanded. They killed hundreds of thousands before we invaded - what do you think will happen to our supporters the day after we are gone or does no one care. Are we so selfish that we believe coming home because we are tired of it is worth their lives?
The military has a plan so why do civilians with no knowledge of what is really happening want to tell the military they can not finish theit mission.

No you can not declare a victory.
If it is a civil war, then why did the Al Queada leader today on film take credit for the war & the killings? What religious group is Al Queada? I thought they were terrorist. They were the ones who said the Democrats legislation proved the US failure & frustrations. I do not believe the US military has failed & will not tell enemies of the USA all over the world that we fail & give up. We will never have national security again if our enemies smell fear. Well thanks to Reid they think they smell it

2007-05-05 17:30:40 · answer #1 · answered by Wolfpacker 6 · 1 2

No, it would be like the Vietnam War without all the casualties.

Battles such as capturing a capital city, etc. can be won. If that is how it is rated then we walk away as winners. Wars on the other hand are fought not only on the battle fields but by government officials.

Have all the objectives been met? Is it a better or worse place than when we entered the country? How have we actually helped?

Are we just cutting our losses because politicians say it is time to stop supporting something that should never have been to begin with, or, is it another political game by all countries involved? Or have all the war mongers finally made enough money to retire comfortably and are thereby calling upon their influence in our governments to stop so that God forbid any investors make a living from stocks, etc.

There are still so many unanswered questions and we the people will never for sure know because our leaders obviously do not believe we the people could be mature enough to understand. Which in itself is absurd.

2007-05-06 00:20:47 · answer #2 · answered by Nana 4 · 1 1

George Walker Bush claimed victory four years ago and the American military is still in Iraq today. The new members of Al Qaeda are Iraqi's that have joined because they want the Americans out of their country and killing and maiming Americans soldiers is how they are trying to be effective against the American occupation.

Think of the Nazis during the Second World War occupying different European Countries and locals were arming themselves to kill the Nazis occupiers, well there is a similarity if you think of it with the American military being still in Iraq. Then you have the Liar by the name of George Walker Bush who says the terrorists will follow them back to the United States and continue the terrorism against the United States if they leave Iraq. What a load of Sh'it from his mouth as it was probably written for him by the lying Scum Bag by the name of Karl Rove who is another worthless piece of Sh'it from the Bush Administration.

George Walker Bush isn't even qualified to flip hamburgers at MacDonalds let alone be President of the United States. This idiot is President because his lying brother Jeb Bush helped to get him Florida by rigging the vote count as he is a member of the PNAC just like the Pig Fuc'ker who started it Dickless Cheney. Bush stole the election and after 9 / 11 used that as a starting point to become a War Mongerer and help the PNAC led by the Pig Fuc'ker Dickless Cheney to invade Iraq illegally when Iraq had nothing to do with 9 / 11.

2007-05-06 01:48:31 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

You can say all the major objectives are finish remember how many years that the US stayed in Japan and Germany. The whole point is if the US leaves iraq all those objectives will just come back out and pretty much went back to square one but with a different leader. If you guys talk about history well their 3,000 soldiers that are dead its not even a quarter to a quarter to the people that died in korea,vietnam,WWII and WWI. War sucks nobody wants to see people dead just finish the job the war maybe wrong but if we leave iraq guess what AL Qaeda would say they won Can you live with that? We killed more al qaeda people but you dont hear that in the news because its all One sided. You know how much would an impact to the world to see AL qaeda beat the US. People will always die but those soldier over there did not join because someone put a gun on his head. They join to make a difference.

2007-05-06 00:33:33 · answer #4 · answered by mz 2 · 1 0

Is winning an unwinnable war mean something?? US must face the facts, they can't control and secure the country they invade, so any withdrawal from Irak will be considered a defeat to the ideas you came to defend in the first place! Now that Irak is more dangerous than any other place on Earth than before the invasion, will send a signal to the rest of the world, that the US don't stand for the values they came to defend, and abandon the task of saving a country for the reason that the price of our Banana is too high...
Lets face it, if US back down from Irak for the wrong reason, your country will never be respected again in the rest of the world!! And I can tell you that in Asia the US will lose face in doing so, which mean that USA will lose much more than a war, they will also lose all the forthcoming wars!!!

2007-05-06 02:05:51 · answer #5 · answered by Jedi squirrels 5 · 0 0

I don't think we can declare any kind of victory. I do think we should pull out. We have been trying to change the thinking of a nation whose politics and religion are so intertwined that there is no way of separating them. They are at least 500 years behind us in some of the ways they treat people. It is still legal to kill your wife under certain circumstances. Even if we stayed there another 50 years I don't think it would make a difference. I expect that when we do leave, the country will quickly be overtaken by another religious zealot who will become the next dictator. It's a no-win situation.

2007-05-06 00:20:38 · answer #6 · answered by Rikki 6 · 1 1

I think we should be big enough to suck it up and admit we can't win. "Losing is not an option!" What freaking ever. I think we should pull out a few thousand troops and send in a few thousand teachers armed with history books, copies of the consititution, and books about women's rights. I don't see much empowering going on, which should have been our goal in this war. Irshad Manji has really opened my eyes to the kinds of things we could be doing over there. I'm jumping on her boat. I'm glad we're there. I'm glad we are trying to put an end to the atrocities being committed by Islamists. Irshad Manji has it right, though, the only way to end this war is for Muslims to stand up and take Islam back from the Islamists. Empower the moderates and give them the tools to reform Islam. I think that's the key. How to do that? Manji has some EXCELLENT ideas on the subject.

2007-05-06 00:18:25 · answer #7 · answered by Gidget 3 · 1 1

In war...there really isn't a win-lose situation. Its where one nation choose to settle up and just halt operations. You can't compare this to football. Use WW II....in the case where Japan was nuked....if they had nukes and responded the next day with two nukes....over Seattle and LA....the US view of operations in the Pacific would have radically changed. We might have had alot of Americans suggesting a compromise and simply withdraw. The same is true if the Nazis had the nukes in 1943 and used four in the UK. Ceasefire would have likely occurred and some truce would have occurred.

2007-05-06 00:43:41 · answer #8 · answered by pepsionice 4 · 0 0

Honor could be satisfied in any number of ways, but strategically there could be problems. I'm not certain we're in a position to solve these; they're clearly not solvable militarily. I would vote for pulling our forces back to secure bases and see if the Iraqis can figure it out. We can keep an eye on Iran to make sure they don't come in to take the place over, and people get to the point where they're done killing each other, we can then start to negotiate.

2007-05-06 00:21:29 · answer #9 · answered by 2n2222 6 · 1 1

People can always 'declare' anything they want.
Remember playing combat as kids and declaring a victory and then arguing long minutes about who actually won? This isn't much different and either way we should never have gone in the first place, so leaving might be the kindest thing to do for all concerned. Sigh. What a nightmare.

2007-05-06 00:13:14 · answer #10 · answered by Habitus 4 · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers