Should britain pull out of iraq? 3 Dead brit soldiers--?

Question

again at the weekend.is that right-that they should have been there?

Ermmm, l was not blaming- U.S.A.- maybe they should too?

Answer 1

I actually wanted to a reply to Feral's post, mostly.

According to Feral's point of view, because Al Qaeda doesn't have a "central office" and operate in cells, we shouldn't be going after them--meaning that if they don't want to fight by traditional rules, it's not worth it. Just let 'em conduct attacks and terrorize 1st-world and 3rd-world countries alike, right? Roll over and let them do whatever the hell they want? Just what have you done to contribute to this war in terms of ending it or helping it to come to a resolution? And don't tell me you "went to a protest"--those are worthless. All protests do is embolden the Al Qaeda killers, because it gives them all the proof and morale they need to keep on with their war of attrition against us. Obviously you know little of what's actually going on in Iraq beyond what the TV and your favorite politicians tell you. The fact that you think this war was about "oil" alone shows your ignorance... it was never about the bloody oil. Barely any oil is even being produced from that country and what little oil IS being produced goes to Iraqis... who have to wait for hours in line just to fill up their cars. If you have a comment on what's going on in Iraq, at least try to come up with your own opinion rather than mindlessly echo the drivel that's been spoonfed to you from the boobtube. You might actually consider talking to people who have BEEN there, or who ARE there, if you want a better picture of the reality of this conflict and the consequences of complacency--complacency is already responsible for the attacks we've suffered on US and UK soil. But if you want to go on thinking that if we ignore our problems they'll just go away, go ahead... maybe some day you'll actually be grateful that there are still people left in your country with some conviction and a sense of purpose who are willing to sacrifice themselves for the ungrateful and oblivious, back home.

Answer 2

3 dead soldiers....is that it? It may sound disrespectful, but we went into Iraq to help clean the country up. While it is taking a while, it is a war. Did you think wed stroll in unhindered and everyone would love us? War is fighting, killing and dying, theyre "not won by retreating", so no, lets stay and fight with our coalition friends. If theyre brave enough to fight tyranny, we certainly are too.

Answer 3

I am in the Army and I have served with many branches over the years from many countries. Just because a few of their soldiers die does not mean they need to pull out. Trust me most of us do not want to be there. At the same time we sighed the contract for what ever country we serve. So my answer is no.

Answer 4

England is just showing support for Bush, so if England ever pulls a bonehead move like we did going into Iraq, hopefully the USA will support England as well. This "war" is a joke. Al Qaeda does not have a central office we can bomb, they are a terrorist organization, with cells that operate independent of each other. To counter this, we would need men on the inside, intelligent intelligence, blah blah. This was about oil and Bush's daddy's nemesis, nothing more.

I made the guy below me cry! LoL, what a fruitcake. Cry Bush some tears of oil baby! LoL I was in the 82nd Airborne moron, I think I know how stupid it is that we are in Iraq. Patrol, patrol, clean weapons, pray not to get car-bombed, patrol, patrol. We are babysitting this new Iraq, and all the while putting bullseyes on ourselves as we walk down the street. I did not say to do nothing, I said to combat them with different tactics. Sitting in Iraq is not doing anything to the terrorists but giving them more pissed off kids to join the cause. Try spouting off something that isn't force-fed to you by Bush. Your point, if you can call it that, makes no sense, and you are as big a dipsh*t as Bush is to repeat it. Think for yourself.

Answer 5

Well if that's Britain's take on things then they have already lost the war on terror and are no longer able to defend themselves
and their country because they are no longer even able to identify the real enemy, they'd much rather blame the US for everything then actually acknowledge and face that real enemy. Even their attempts to minimize the threat by not even calling it what it is is proof of that.

Answer 6

No it doesnt mean you pull out the fact is there is no ultimatum of if we fight them there we wont fight them here. They can hardly maintain regions in their own homeland what makes you think they can attempt to take over and most of all...WIN? are people that chickenshit that they doubt their own logic and reason for themselves and TRUST lawmakers to. the same ones who dragged them in. fact is major powers these days (like USA and the UK) are so technologically advanced compared to other regions (mid east) that even if they tried and conspired and all. they couldnt make it happen. its fact. the only ones who can are those inside...

Answer 7

What the heck...join the rest of the moochers...leave the work of keeping the world safe for you to the US and few remaining responsible countries.

Answer 8

what about when we help Britain in wwll? we didn't have to do that. we were at war with Japan,not Hitler.Even before we got into wwll we gave Britain money and supplies. I wont even start with wwl.

Answer 9

Better to fight the Islamic terrorists in Iraq than in the UK in my opinion.

Answer 10

Leave or not, UK will still be fighting terrorists, and dying.