If we left Iraq before the gov't could protect itself...?

Question

Would the people who strap bombs to children eventually take over? And what do you think they would do with the gov't oil revenues?

Why can't you liberals use common sense?

Do you not understand how much wealthy the country of Iraq possesses? Do you not understand the amount of damage a terror group could do with that wealth, if they controlled it?

I, seriously, can not comprehend why liberals refuse to see this.

----

and before someone says, "you don't know who would control it....", is it worth the risk to allow them a chance by leaving?????

--------------------
--------------------

The MAJORITY of the iraqi people are not behind the sectarian (EXTREMIST) positions. Those people will most likely never go away, but we must allow the government which was ELECTED BY THE MAJORITY of Iraqi's the ability to defend itself! Not doing so would be allowing the EXTREMISTS (EITHER SIDE) EVENTUAL CONTROLL!

Answer 1

The people who strap bombs to their chests end up dead, so they aren't going to take anything over.

Whether we stay there or not, the Iraq civil/sectarian war will continue until one side or the other achieves dominance. And that side will maintain dominance only by ruthlessly suppressing the other side -- which is exactly what Saddam did, at US request many years ago.

You speak about "common sense". Unless the US is willing to either (1) continually support the new Iraq govt or (2) become the new Iraq govt, the conflict is going to continue.

The terrorists are not going to get any wealth -- unless they become the government, which is what happened in Palestine and Afghanistan and Libya -- and we deal with that the way we deal with any other political issue.

Our continued presence in Iraq isn't going to change anything, except postpone the temporary resolution of the conflict, all the while costing American lives while accomplishing nothing.

I seriously cannot understand how any intelligent person can refuse to see this.

Answer 2

The conflict in Iraq isn't about terrorists it's about who is gonna control the government...the problem in Iraq lies in that there are three major factions (plus smaller one's who feel they have to be loyal to their tribes) that keep f-ing things up. You have the Shiites, Sunni's and the Kurds who are all against each other. We are only delaying the inevitable which will be 3 new nations under these three people's. They can't get along at all and the bombings, etc is proving this. Iraq was better off with the tyrant Saddam Hussein because he maintained the peace between all the groups..now all hell has broken loose. Why can't we just all use common sense and understand we can't change any of this...this is something THEY have to do, not us.

Answer 3

I think we already fought our war of independence for american freedom. If iraq really wants freedom, they need to pick up a weapon and fight for it. I have no problem fighting to free those who want to be free. But this is like busting in to a prison to save your friend and him saying, nah i'd rather stay, then allowing the other inmates to rape and kill you.

Answer 4

1) Yes they would take over.
2) Fund terrorism.
3) They can't use what they don't have.
4) No they can'y.
5) No they can't.

Answer 5

Since bush has given the Iraq "government" an open ended commitment to our military men and women and weapons, what makes you think they want to fight for their freedom and country when they have our military to fight it for them!

Answer 6

Thank GOD President Bush brought al-Qaeda to Iraq!

Answer 7

For in the bible it says judge not other people for you will be judged by God for judging other people.

Answer 8

did you mean to post this three years ago?