I'm hopeful.
But I believe that mohammedans only respect overwhelming force, and can only be lead by a strong right arm. We must crush all the fight out of them, make them fear us, then they;ll respect us. it is the mohammedan way.
Be Blessed in Christ Jesus !
Minister
2007-05-12 07:15:41
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
I am more than hopeful it will work, if given the chance.
The person who said they hope it doesn't work is either a sadist, an idiot, or a democrate who wishes to give the democrates the power to take over and expand the terrorists war of terror.
Someone here said why are we only sending 35,000 troops not 150,000. Ok a little correction is needed. We already have approx. 150,000 soldiers in iraq. the 35,000 are additional troops.
Also I am sure even if we catch double the number of al qaeda and foriegn insurgents the democrates will still view it as a loss. Why? Well we will suffer more US soldiers deaths then previous months/years. That is what the democarates and liberials will focus on , not the positive changes.
Also many have said what will this accomplish? OMG how dumb... For those please read about counterinsurgency tactics PLEASE!!! (roger trinqueir - i feel outlines the tactics best)
Basiclly the Surge has already shown great signs of progress. Militant groups have begun to negotiate with the Iraqi government. Also many insurgents have been caught and I suspect many have been turned and re-inplanted into the terror orgs to help us find the insurgents and inform us of their future plans, and methods of obatining weapons.
Most of all the Surge is also being done so we can continue to train the Iraqi Army and police. During the surge we are also teaching the Iraqis how to conduct counterinsurgency actions. We are also training Iraqi Military anaylst and advisors. These wil help keep the Iraqi army in check and promote ethical tactics.
I have noticed a lot of Bush bashers here that say Bush is the problem. Bush has admited he made mistakes, but he has corrected many early mistakes, and continues to do better at listening to our Military leaders and other countries. What do they think would have happened if Clinton had been president?
Also one thing many people are blind to is that since 2005 Bush became aware that we needed new tactics to combat insurgents. He sat down with our brightest generals and has taken their advice. If this would have happened in Veitnam we would have done a much better job. For the soldier in the trech it has always been the politicians they blame for not listening to them and their commanders. WELL the US gov is listening and acting! Many cite that there will be more US deaths because of the surge. Bush and petreaus have both stated this is most likely but necessary.
In the USA we have a 100% volenter military. Why because some of us respect and appreciate our countries freedoms so much that we are willling to risk or lives to ensure our freedoms. Most US soldiers beleive in what they are doing even if they would rather be home with family. But these men and women know all to well there is bad people who wish to attack america and our freedoms. Oh BTW Bin laden stated in approx. 2003 that he is planning another major attack on the USA in 2012. Wil it take another major attack on our country before the democrates believe the terrorist want to, and can kill us in our own country????
2007-05-11 08:45:20
·
answer #2
·
answered by Ian Bach 2
·
4⤊
1⤋
Let me start out by saying that I don't think that we should have gone over there in the first place, but regardless, we are there now. I don't see how we can even think about pulling out until the country can stand on it's own two feet.
Why we are there and our thoughts on whether we should be there or not is irrelevant. The fact is, we have made a mess and we need to fix it. If we were to pull out now and leave the country as unstable as it is now, we would only be asking for trouble.
I think that any political candidate that says that they have an exact time line for removing our troops is either just saying what they think the American public wants to hear or they are fooling themselves and anyone who will listen and they will probably not get my vote.
I truly hope that the surge works so we can bring the troops home as soon as possible.
It doesn't matter if a candidate is Republican or Democrat, what matters to me is if they are looking at things logically at this point. My votes depend on whether I feel the candidate is telling the truth and if they seem to have a firm grasp of any given situation.
2007-05-11 10:28:30
·
answer #3
·
answered by nana4dakids 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
The surge is working, archives exhibits a shrink in violence, and that's undemanding information in conflict that the occupation point is suitable gained by making use of putting as many boots on the floor as a threat. those are undemanding information, what you're talking approximately is a propaganda campaign being released by making use of insurgents and our own media. particular, rockets and mortars will circulate off, yet while an incident happens it quite is a technique or the different evidence that each and every little thing is failing? Open your eyes and seem on the enormous image! Vietnam became a lot worse than this, the two interior the conflict zone and at living house.
2017-01-09 15:56:40
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Wow... you see so many agreeing with that poor excuse of an American you quoted. I see the answers like... you can't employ the same failed strategies to fix the issues.. and so on. I wonder if when they get sick and need an anti-biotic they take it for a day or two, decide it doesn't work so they stop taking it. Clearly the medication has started to work but it requires more to "finish the job".
I use this analogy because they might understand it better in story format. Since I know the lib mindset they will claim "but it doesn't work... we need a new strategy". I do have a response to both.. just to save everyone the time.. We already know our troops are effective.. thus the taking down of an evil dictator... we need more "medicine" or troops to finish the disease... And, who ever heard of no treatment and run away from the disease as a cure?
2007-05-11 10:51:50
·
answer #5
·
answered by Mr. Perfect 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
Earnest ... I have to presume that the "lady" who was determined to see the failure of this surge campaign has one or more of the following problems:
• She predicts a difficult mission ahead and so much hates to be wrong, she'd go so far as to hope for failure just so she could say she was right.
• Is filled with hatred for not understanding the implications of a loss and bashes those who'd try to succeed, no matter how noble the cause.
• She's a sub-teen (actually or mentally) and never heard of the Arab oil embargo of 1973, which to her perspective on things must seem like ancient history.
• She thinks that keeping the peace means withdrawing all U.S. forces from the overseas locations we've maintained over the past 50-60 years and minding our own business, as per Bill Clinton's defense policy practices.
Sorry to feel/reply so sarcastically to her way of thinking, but I graduated from the Ronald Reagan school of "peace through strength" while she, on the other hand, must have attended the Michael Moore Institute of America Bashers.
2007-05-11 09:39:26
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
Since there is nothing an average person can do about it, I do hope it works. I'm a liberal and have never been for a complete 100% pull-out. With vacations starting, I find it doubtful that without the momentum of political strengthening of Iraq, that the surge will work. You can't have "victory" unless things become safer and there is a governing political body that can function daily.
The troops will continue to work through the summer defending themselves and contractors, training Iraqi troops and trying to take out the enemy. Why can't the politicians show their support for that and keep toiling along with them? That troubles me more than anything right now about Iraq; I think it is irresponsible of both governments to take the vacation.
2007-05-11 06:52:10
·
answer #7
·
answered by genmalia 3
·
4⤊
1⤋
earnest, what can i think?
what those naysayers in our country fail to understand is that we all have a personal stake in this war against terrorism, this battle for peace - no matter where it's fought.
i wish they would stop focusing upon the cost and adopt a more global prospective. the streets of baghdad are, afterall, only a plane ride away.
all americans need to support our efforts there and not only hope, but also pray, that our troops will always be successful - no matter what cause is undertaken, no matter the place....
2007-05-13 16:46:33
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Everyone HOPES it works.. but Bush brings out the pessimist in many people.. leaving no belief that it WILL work.. there is a big difference.
On a side note.. do you think Bush would have sent the troop surge if not for the people electing a democratic congress? In all honesty we would still have Rumsfeld and more of the same slow bleeding in Iraq we had for 4 years don't you think? So at the very least.. their being elected has caused a change.. whether that change is good or bad is still up in the air.. but at least it's not more of the slow bleed.
2007-05-11 06:57:13
·
answer #9
·
answered by pip 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
I'm sad about this sort of attitude and for the people with it. How can you not have hope, expecially in bad situations?? Hope is the thing that gets us thru and doesn't cost us anything. How can you not for the sake of lives, our freedoms, and everything else at least have the hope for good things to happen? Hope I know sometimes is all you have to get you thru and without it you are done! Kinda long winded I know but it is such an important thing!
2007-05-11 06:50:49
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
0⤋
I was going to say "of course I HOPE it works." But, based on your statement about that girl's opinion, I guess "of course" is a bit of an irony, huh? I hope it works, like I hoped Democracy in Iraq would work, like I hope I will win the lottery. They're all positive thoughts and aspirations, but I believe the odds of any of them happening are about the same. So, I can hope, but I'm also realistic (unlike a lot of people who are blindly for the war as much as those who are blindly against it).
2007-05-11 06:50:50
·
answer #11
·
answered by wizbangs 5
·
3⤊
1⤋