If one year from now the war continues to be unsuccessful or the situation worsens, would you support a measure to start bringing troops home and try other non-combative means to achieve success? If not explian what you would do.
2007-05-18 07:13:41 · 17 answers · asked by wingspan1985 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
If the situation gets worse and the Iraq government can't pull themselves together then I don't know what we'll do. We're d'ed if we do and d'ed if we don't. We must succeed but what non-combative measures are there? You can't negotiate with the radicals. Iraq must include all factions of their own people so the civil war won't end till that happens. The Iraq situation is too complicated to simply say stay and fight or run like cowards. I don't know who has the best answer but I know it's not a simple one.
Don't forget that this isn't just about Iraq. This includes all the neighbors too. They are supplying people and money to our enemies.
I support our president and I pray for our troops. We must succeed and our boys are the best and capable of anything.
2007-05-18 07:20:11 · answer #1 · answered by Jasmine 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I support the war but not the way it's being carried out. The US is attempting to pacify a people (islamic fanatics) that absolutely hate us, in a country that's had so much war they probably think it's normal.
My opinion: We should ratchet up the forces in Iraq and take on a no tolerance, take no prisoners attitude. If you plan on hiding in a Mosque, consider that building gone. Hold that hard line until the cruel side of Islam says uncle!
If we pull out and attempt diplomatic measures with out flexing our muscle, we will be inviting more attacks on our own soil. I'm convinced that's what fanatics are dying for, they want to kill us, why help them?
2007-05-18 14:32:34 · answer #2 · answered by ggraves1724 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I will always support the war even if I dont support the people who started it. Always remember.. The crap you see on TV isnt the war. Its nothing close to whats goin on over there. The news is so biased and busy hunting for a great 'story' that they generally report 1/1000th of whats goin on.. and that little bit is how many people died that day and nothing more. I know this from my own experience as I am now a medically retired US Army SF guy looking for a job..
2007-05-18 14:20:56 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Yes and no. I think other non-combative means should already be in heavy use in conjunction with the war. And I am all for bringing our troops home, Just am not willing to draw a line in the sand. A clear set of goals should be developed and worked towards before the determination is made to bring troops home.
2007-05-18 14:18:34 · answer #4 · answered by chris m 5 · 5⤊ 2⤋
david : While Clinton was in the White House tossing bombs on Osama's camps, the GOP Congress accused him of trying to deflect attention away from the really important business - Clinton's sex life. Then they essentially shut down the government so they could impeach the man for LYING ABOUT CHEATING ON HILLARY.
Grow up, dude.
2007-05-18 14:26:09 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, my husband is in the military, and Americans do not know what is actually going on there.
Many members of the service know things that CNN won't report. The American public is being led around by the nose by people determined to report what they wish the news was.
There are a few journalist who are honest enough or brave enough to really report the news, but their reports are swept under the table by the news establishment.
The current course is the correct one!
2007-05-18 14:19:50 · answer #6 · answered by Free To Be Me 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
If liberals hadn't detracted from the real purpose of the war, we would have cleaned up already.
You don't want to know what I would do to end the war. It would be non-combative, I assure you, and our troops would be home quickly.
2007-05-18 14:23:41 · answer #7 · answered by mspriveye 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Until the military says this is a non-winnable sitiuation, I wont believe anyone else. Let our Troops do their job. They know what they are doing.
2007-05-18 14:17:45 · answer #8 · answered by Alissandrya 4 · 5⤊ 1⤋
NO! The only thing I'd support at that time is a major major ramping up of operations, and the setting aside of the stupid liberal regualtions and controls that prevent the military from really doing their jobs.
2007-05-18 14:18:19 · answer #9 · answered by Sane 6 · 6⤊ 2⤋
No, I wouldn't support defeat.
I would support using less 'conventional' means to pacify Iraq, however. Make of that what you will.
2007-05-18 14:20:47 · answer #10 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋