meaning the war would only last a month and America has no casualites. why do some people think like that? I am no talking about on here (not excluding it either) but also in the real world. and for those this applies to, dont try and get all high and mighty, stand up and explain yourself.
2007-05-18 03:47:32 · 12 answers · asked by Jahpson 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Impressive answers guys!
2007-05-18 03:58:43 · update #1
Because they/we think we have no business being there in the first place, and want us out ASAP.
10 years from now, there will be another Saddam in place there anyway.
It's only been like that for the past 1,000 years.
Trying to straighten out the Middle East militarily is just plain ignorant (of history) and asinine.
Like most of Bush's policy decisions.
2007-05-18 04:00:09 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
The War in Iraq was over the first day of invasion. We are not fighting a physical enemy, but a state of mind that is different than us. Bush wanted to invade Iraq before 9/11 and used 9/11 as an opportunity to invade. The USA is not the only government on the planet Earth. Nature proves that therory. Iraq is a no /win situation. We must leave and let the pick-up-sticks fall where they may fall and help where they may fall to help. Guns do not stop the will of the people, Bush thought that it could. I know that if anyone invaded my house, no matter how unhappy I was, I would be angry. It would be no persons business. It is as simple as that. Live and let live.
2007-05-18 04:05:18 · answer #2 · answered by judy 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I've never heard anyone say that they don't expect deaths or casualties in in the Iraq.
When mr. bush began this war, he promised we would be there just a few months. Here it is over 4 years later with no real end in sight. Most who disagree with the administration's policies are tired of it. Let's face it. Troops are dying every day. We should hope it's over soon! Why lose any more lives?
2007-05-18 03:56:05 · answer #3 · answered by katydid 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
President Bush and his handlers (such as Paul Wolfowitz) told America that the war in Iraq would be easy to win in a short time, that the Iraqis would welcome the US soldiers as liberators. When a president makes a promise like that, the American people have a right to expect him to keep it. When he does not keep it, we have a right to hold him accountable for the unexpected losses to our families and our pocketbooks.
President Bush also told us a number of other lies. He said that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, yet it had none. He said that Iraq either had nuclear weapons (it didn't) or was about to get them (it wasn't). He tried to link Saddam Hussein with Osama bin Laden, but there was no such link. He tried to blame the Iraqi government for "murdering its own citizens" with poison gas, when in fact the kurds were killed as collateral damage by an attack from Iran during the Iran-Iraq war. Bush should be held accountable for each of these lies, in proportion to the damage that they have done to our country.
2007-05-18 05:46:36 · answer #4 · answered by blaringhorn 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It's the peace-loving hippies who think war is easy and there should never be any casualites in a war that think this. They know even know the what it takes to win a damn war.
2007-05-18 04:12:52 · answer #5 · answered by Saint 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
for one thing, people like Cheney and Rumsfeld said it would only take about 6 weeks.
for another, we attacked a country of only 25 million people that had virtually no army, no navy, no air force, etc. Whey would we think it would take longer than a week to defeat someone that couldn't even defend themselves. By the way, that was 5 years ago.
Most important of all, we all know that this war did not have to happen. Iraq was NOT a threat to the U.S.
2007-05-18 03:54:48 · answer #6 · answered by truth seeker 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Funny you should say that cos youve given me a great idea. What about if yankees pull out and go back to bombing from the air like they used to. Was a much more successful tactic.Just bomb the hills around afghan and pakistan boarder to crap,slap a few on taliban and al queda strongholds and if they have such great technology why dont they follow the people who hand the tapes into al jazeeras back to their lair then blow seven colours of crap out of it jees im a genius.
2007-05-18 03:55:22 · answer #7 · answered by thfcsydney 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
A month? The actual war has been over for 4 YEARS!! 90% of our troops killed since Bush's "mission accomplished" speech have been picked off one by one by insurgents, only 10% of which are Al Queada.
2007-05-18 03:58:49 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
How do we know when we win the war in Iraq? Does that mean that no Sunni or Shiite is fighting? Your right no matter how many American lives have to be lost it is a small price to pay to keep Sunni and Shiite from killing each other because the only lives that really matter is theres.
Also, we want to let as many as has to die to protect Kurds from being killed by other muslims. More muslims are being killed by other muslims. so we have to feel expendable to be able to really help them from killing each other.
Also, the other countries should feel the same because the only lives that matter are muslims. The rest of us are just infidels. then to you should remember they are killing each other in Africa to. So if their are any young men who do mannage to survive in Iraq they should be sent to Africa.
2007-05-18 03:56:41 · answer #9 · answered by Ruth 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
the fact that the war was already won,makes this a strange question. those that feel there should be no casualities are thinking along the same lines as those that think democrats want to surrender. you can't surrender after you win. i think the real issues those that complain about casualities have is they feel we shouldn't have invaded Iraq.
2007-05-18 04:01:58 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋