No it can't win this war as there is no war to win on first place..its just an illegal occupation of a place which does not belong to them at all !!
But Yes through media he can tell the world that "he is winning' but who would believe? even his own nation has no faith in him anymore !
2007-06-13 08:59:21
·
answer #1
·
answered by ★Roshni★ 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
The US must work on a multilateral framework with Iran and Iraq on getting the countries to work together. Especially with Iran, if we can convince Iran to commit to regional stability, the Iranian governmnet would deter from its nuclear ambitions. Iran does have a leverage in diplomatic influence. We can obviously establish a forum where both parties' grievances can be addressed. The US would have to drop on its precondiitons and Iran might even agree to pull out its support of the various insurgent groups in Iraq. The key to actually ending this war is getting the cooperation of the Middle East, particularly its key player, Iran.
I support the notion of keeping our troops away from harm but as now, we can't pull them out or else a genoicde will most likely occur. If we are concerned for the Iraqi civilians and their general security, we must deploy more UN and EU troops to mediate the violence. We might gradually withdraw from Iraq but we can still send advisors to Iraq's military and support its political infrastructure.
2007-06-13 08:10:20
·
answer #2
·
answered by ibid 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I see your point, and it's a good one. I like President Bush, I'm angry because he has let Iraq "go on" for so long. If he would acknowledge that the US. just needs to pull out and leave Iraq to "their own devices," that would end this. So many lives have been lost because a group of people with an understanding and language barrier just want "out of the crap." The only way they know is suicide---the number of lives taken with the life of the suicide bomber's doesn't matter. Why can't Bush see that, sometimes, even the nation with the strongest power in the world fails? It's hard to except failure, especially in his position. He knows to everything there is a winning and losing side. So the US. fails on this one "war"...Something that wasn't a war until HE decided to "keep on keepin' on." I believe in that philosophy also. In this case, what have we achieved? More fighting in the streets. Congats Mr. President, we've now gone "full-tilt"! I'm very American, go USA, go Mr. President. If we could only get my statements through Bush's head... You can't talk to a man who won't listen even if, like Ford Motor Company, you "have a better idea".
2007-06-13 08:26:02
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
We need to immediately move on to the rebuilding phase. Let the Iraqi's see the terrorists blowing up Iraq's new school system, much needed electrical grids, hospitals (the things Americans are accustomed to) and see how fast the average Iraqi stands up. We will not defeat the terrorists without the ground support of Iraqi citizens. We must make them understand that we are truly in this for the good of Iraq.
2007-06-13 08:13:03
·
answer #4
·
answered by CHARITY G 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
If this is a "war" we have one sad military. Iraq has no military yet we can't "beat" them after four years? We fought a world war on two continents and beat countries who were pretty good at manufacturing weapons of war in less time. It's all a diversion for some other purpose, I wonder what it is???
2007-06-13 08:16:52
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
There is no war in Iraq. It's an occupation. The "war" was over when we failed to find WMD and removed Saddam from power. We are there to ensure that big oil companies successfully negotiate the production sharing agreements with the Iraqi government and control 70 % of their oil production. And that's a fact.
2007-06-13 08:13:40
·
answer #6
·
answered by Hemingway 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, first of all you bring in lot's of alcohol and start passing it out for free. Then you inform all the Iraqi people that on a particular day the troops will be rounding up everyone who isn't drunk because the strict form of Islam that the terrorists practice forbids it. Then you start rounding up the sober ones because they are the terrorists. The rest of the terrorists who have not yet been caught will then quickly rush to obtain alcohol so as to blend in and avoid detection. Then blow themselves up when attempting to build IEDs while drunk.
Nah, I'm only kidding. My point is that lots of people smarter than we are have been trying to answer that same question and haven't so why would you possibly think you'd find the answer here?
2007-06-13 08:24:04
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well we are building our massive bases in iraq right now. As long as we keep the people of iraq in conflict with each other then i suppose america and the west can do as they please in that region. In the grand scheme of things 10-20 of our soldiers dying a week is not something that really bothers those in power. Winning depends on your interpretation of the word. If by winning you mean leaving iraq to the people of iraq in a free self governed country then i doubt it will ever happen. If winning to you means our hegemonic control of the regions oil reserves and important placement near other "enemies" of our Corporate masters then we probably are already winning.
In response to Ryan above, actually Saddam with his army did a pretty good job of containing sectarian strife. I honestly believe that we allow (if not help instigate) this strife, ever heard of divide and conquer? United we stand divided we fall....
2007-06-13 08:10:41
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Iraq was the second largest oil producer in the world before the Bush family came to power. If they were to be on line oil would fall below $50 A BARREL and a lot of Texas Oil Crooks would have to cut thier expnses
2007-06-19 12:32:57
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
The only way to succeed in any military action is to allow the generals to run the war. When politicians run wars, it never goes well.
If Patton had been required to be politically correct and ask Washington DC for permission for every action he took, we'd all be goose stepping and speaking German.
2007-06-13 08:33:27
·
answer #10
·
answered by Combatcop 5
·
0⤊
0⤋