To those who say we are losing in Iraq...what do you think of this?

Question

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070726/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_crocker

"The surge (increase of 30,000 American troops) has done very well indeed in making a difference in security conditions. There's no question, in the Anbar (province) and Baghdad area. But it's not a light switch. You don't just flip something up and everyone is reconciled," Crocker said in an interview in his office in Saddam Hussein's Republican Palace.

He concluded: "I think it is very important that for own interests that we stay with this until Iraq gets to the point of sustainable stability, I think that can be done."

Do you still think Iraq is a lost cause?

svictor24: Obviously you do cause you took the time to answer the question.

And I think the Iraqis care.

svictor24: If you don't care, then why did you bother to respond to the question? For the measly two points? That is sad.

To the rest of you who answered:

Though I don't agree with some of the answers, it is nice to see that most of you had a lot of well thought out answers.

Svictor24: I don't want to stop what you are saying....and I did not complain. The whole point of Yahoo Answers is for everyone to get involved and for there to be varied opinions...though, sometimes people tell me how to answer, and they tell me I can't answer if I don't like something (like Bush...remember that question?)...and that bothers me.

And I don't 'love' Bush. This question had nothing to do with President Bush. It had to do with the War in Iraq, and for some reason you answered without one comment about the war in Iraq...and that is what bothers me...your answer had nothing to do with the question.

svictor24: In one of your replies could you at least answer the question? I mean come on. No one else found it too hard to write a well thought out reply, yet you are constantly bashing Bush even when the question isn't even about him.

If you would stop insulting me and my approval of the president, maybe I would take your side...seriously, there are a lot of good answers here...I don't agree with some, but they are still good answers....and you can't even respond with even one sentence that has to do with my question.

Oh, and you may want to brush up on your spelling...I haven't heard of the word 'fugly' before.

Answer 1

The war has helped Iraq tremendously.

Bush plans to civilize Iraq after its undeserving history. Iraq consisted of mostly innocent Shiite Muslims who wants a normal life like the Americans, British, Germans, Russians, and so forth. Bush plans to build 10,000 post offices, schools, universities, business offices, hotels, hospitals, and government buildings all over Iraq and hopefully soon to be Afghanistan. This will create millions of jobs for Iraq's large population. Iraq deserve it after years and years of brutal politicians and extremist invading their once prosper nation. Is it wrong for Bush to establish these plans to make Iraq grow? For selfish liberals the answer is yes. We cant leave Iraq hanging with its 60 million people below the literacy standard, extremist attacking , and a high poverty. He opened up doors to Americans who never seized the opportunity to make a decent living. These Americans can join the military and take advantage of its benefits instead of being spoon feed money through welfare. I wanted to follow my father's footstep and enroll as an electrical engineer in the airforce. Bush is spending a portion of the government money to help Iraq. If this makes you mad then move to Iraq and see how is like to live there, you would be begging for someone to help build schools, hospitals, and to take down these suicide bombers. All you see on tv is these Iraqians holding protest to make the troops leave. Thats only the small portion of Iraqians and would you trust the media after the lies they fed to you for the past 20 years? Would Clinton spend a portion of the government money to help 3rd world countries like Bush did? No, Clinton would throw the money for welfare to Americans who cant even try to get a job.

Answer 2

Same story different year, could have been Gen. Westmorland in 1969, making progress steadily. more troops bla bla bla. The Brits pulled out of Iraq early in the twentieth century because it was too costly and hard to control.
T.E. Lawrence wrote of Iraq; Aka. Lawrence of Arabia
Writing of the Arab resistance to Turkish occupation in the 1914-18 war, he asks of the insurgents (in Iraq and elsewhere): "... suppose they were an influence, a thing invulnerable, intangible, without front or back, drifting about like a gas? Armies were like plants, immobile as a whole, firm-rooted, nourished through long stems to the head. The Arabs might be a vapour

"Rebellion must have an unassailable base ...

In the minds of men converted to its creed. It must have a sophisticated alien enemy, in the form of a disciplined army of occupation too small to fulfill the doctrine of acreage: too few to adjust number to space, in order to dominate the whole area effectively from fortified posts.

"It must have a friendly population, not actively friendly, but sympathetic to the point of not betraying rebel

Answer 3

The Pentagon, West Point, and the National Security advisory all know that insurgencies don't work over the long run.

And right now the insurgents are killing more Iraqi's than Americans. If the U.S. pulls out anytime soon, the insurgents will swarm into Iraq and form another terrorist government, prompting a return by the U.S. So lets stay and finish what Saddam started.

Answer 4

Whether or not the facts are true, one thing is certain. Iraq is very unstable. There are divisions within Parliament. It take more than a few years to rebuild a country. It's hard enough to do it alone much less with insurgents creating chaos.
I don't believe it's a lost cause, but it will take considerable time.

Answer 5

Well first of all...it's one of Bush's cronies that reported it. Second of all we never should have been there to begin with. There never would have been a "surge" at all had we minded our own business. If anything we should have been sending a "surge" into Afghanistan to find Osama..but of course that would have ruined the Bush-Bin Laden relationship and of course we don't want to see that happen right?

Answer 6

yes it is a lost cause and so are all the political followers that can't think for themselves, "it is best to stay for our own interests" who's own interest? we have no interests in this country! they produce nothing, the only thing they buy from the US are weapons. We are not getting any oil out of this or any thing else, the only thing this has accomplished is made a lot defense company billionaires and driven up the cost of oil, yeah their "own interests" and things will go back to the way they were once we leave!!

Answer 7

Who the heck cares? Not me. We still have the worst President in the world.

Whatever!! I can respond to anything I want and you can't stop me so stop complaining and get on with your self.

Grow up. It's not my fault you are a Bush Lover

You need to grow up and get a damn life and stop being a Bush lover bc at the end of the day, he don't care nothing about you, so get ur fugly head from in between his legs.

Answer 8

I don't want to hear from the White House. You will only get their version, or their BS.

We NEVER should have been there in the first place! If someone was going to do this, it should have been done when the whole world was involved! His father should have done this.

Answer 9

Every 'war' is a lost cause.
Particularly 'wars' that are unconstitutional, illegal, unjustifiable and immoral - and are started for no other reasons that OIL and WAR PROFITEERING.
Anyone believes that this 'war' began to defend America against some mysterious 'evil empire' is sadly mistaken.
Anyone who believes this 'war' is all about bringing democracy to Iraq is incredibly naive.
Anyone who believes this 'war' will establish peace in the Middle East is carelessly misinformed.
When Americans say "...it is very important...for our own interests that we stay with this..." what they mean is: "What is all of OUR oil doing underneath THEIR sand??"
Just because we're bigger than everybody else doesn't mean we have the right to squander 55% of the world's natural resources while making up about 5% of the global population. No wonder everybody else hates us! We are nothing more than schoolyard bullies. -RKO- 07/26/07

Answer 10

I wouldn't believe anything said by one of Bush's flunkies.
They're world-class liars,just like their boss. Besides,with
all the recent bombings,how is this particular lie even close
to believable?