At best --- assuming you consider the surge to be working at all.
But the goal of the Surge was to stabilize Baghdad and allow the Iraqi govt to take over more direct control. They haven't stabilized Baghdad, the Iraqi govt is more fractured than ever, and Iraqi now has 40% fewer combat-ready units than it did before.
2007-07-31 07:34:40
·
answer #1
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
The surge will work as long as enough Iraqi forces can be trained to hold the areas that are pacified by the Americans. We only need enough Americans to clear out the bad guys. Getting enough competent Iraqi security forces has been the problem. Its working so far, but thats because we're focusing on Baghdad. Once it is pacified, we have to move on to the rest of the country. That is where the numbers issue becomes a problem.
2007-07-31 08:27:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, contrary to popular opinion of the Democrats and the anti-war crowd, the enemy is not stupid. Likewise, it is a WAR, which means that it is messy and nothing comes out perfect despite the best of plans. That is why you have to adapt as you go along, as is the case with this surge.
The insurgency got a foothold because the enemy was smarter than our best plan, and now we have to clean them out. Once we clean them out, not only will the local people have a fresh opportunity to maintain their peace, but they will discourage the enemy.
This is a psychological war too, and when the terrorists are defeated in Iraq, it will be a huge blow to their morale and a major defeat of their efforts. This is invaluable to the safety of our country. If the terrorists realize we can beat them, it will weaken their resolve to try. The terrorists are watching what goes on in Iraq, don't kid yourself!
2007-07-31 07:46:00
·
answer #3
·
answered by julie m 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
the surge stategy is absurd. it's important to remember that there are more islamics in this world than there are americans. "Commonly cited estimates of the Muslim population in 2007, range from 900 million to 1.3 billion."
2007-07-31 07:43:18
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
thats a stupid question...and redundant too.
I agree with you that we have plans for starting and not for finishing. I think we should be MORE willing to finish the job than do it half azzed.
2007-07-31 07:31:26
·
answer #5
·
answered by smitty031 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
yes , and yes if it shows a lot of progress the draft isn't that far away
2007-07-31 07:31:45
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋