Is the war in Iraq Lost?

Question

Allowing for the militaries surge of troops into iraq[i think the number is an aditional 35-4o thousand this is suppose to help stabalize the insurrection. in my opinion its a waste of time. Urban urwarfare is notorious for swallowing up troops. Perhaps a number of 200 to 300 thousand would be a more realistic goal to solving this war.But that would call for the draft and considering the majorities opinion of bush now u would probably have another american civil war if he tried bring that back.]

Answer 1

this war was lost when the first bush president left from over there
this is just trying to fix what pops screwed up 15 years earlier

Answer 2

An outsider cannot win a civil war, as this is, whether that term is used or not. A massive number of troops could perhaps put a stop to the violence, but the issue is "hearts and minds", actions are secondary. Imagine how you would feel if another country invaded your own. Whatever their intentions, the invaders would be hated, and all of the various facets of society would seek to gain the upper hand in the ensuing turmoil. So yes, it is lost. It was lost from the start, though hindsight is 20/20.

Answer 3

The war in Iraq is not even close to being a loss. We are only half way into the additional troop buildup. More and more should be demanded of the Iraqi Government to take on more responsibility of control so withing a year we can draw down a majority of our troops their. In the big picture , we cannot lose this war. It is only part of the bigger picture in the world war on terror. We need to convince Iraq's neighbors to work more for peace in their area of the world , so we do not have to be the babysitter for them. There is so much hatred in that part of the world, it needs to start with the middle east leadership to work together in order to solve things. More troops is not going to fix it now. We need to stay to stabilize the country, then we need to leave. The only solution is to get more oil and gas out of our country and less from that part of the world.

Answer 4

It really depends on how you define war. In a classical sense, America was victorious when they rolled into Baghdad. On the other hand, America has been unable to bring about the long term goal of stabilizing Iraq into a democratic power in the region. It is further unlikely that this will ever occur. By this view, the war is lost.

Answer 5

I think nature has a way of adding incinitive to the side that is RIGHT in a war.
the bushbunch took our fool armies there for EVIL and to do murder.
The Freedom Fighters on both sides of their civil stifes hate the great EVIL satan bush first!

Answer 6

It's no longer a war. The people that the U.S. originally fought against were defeated and hanged.

If the U.S. needs more troops in Iraq, they can train more Iraqis. After all, it is their country and they are the ones that have to live in it.

Answer 7

It is a losing situation.

We may have one the first round in the invasion, i.e. putting out Saddam & Co.

But we're losing the war of occupation - just like the Israelis are in Palestine.

We would need hundreds of thousands to control the situation there - and we'd need hundreds of billions of dollars to support it.

Answer 8

you know that the people in Iraqs are getting killed by the us forces and support terrorists in iraq to kill people. Till now only the us goverment that is a liar said more than 3000 thousands of our soldiers are died. that shows that US is losing and lo st the battle

Answer 9

The war is not so much a loss but it will never be a win

Answer 10

Yes.

Of course it depends on what side you're on.

The American people lost the day they invaded.