2007-08-01 13:28:23 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Ryan: this attitude is not defeatist, it realistic. Remember Vietnam. We were all going to beat the pinkos, weren't we? And, as far as I know, it remains one, if not the most unpopular, wars this country has fought...
My answer to this question: Iraq isn't a sinking ship: it's a sunken ship. Lies on the ocean floor. Would have sunk deeper than the Marianas Trench if it could. As someone before me said, Al Qaeda attacked the US, not Iraq. And there are terrorists everywhere, making terrorist attacks everywhere. There's terrorists in Spain. Why don't we go fight in Spain with them? There's terrorists in Colombia. Why don't we go there as well? The fact is that Al Qaeda terrorists could hide and get support from many countries, and that would not give us the right to go kill thousands of innocent civilians. Bin Laden planned the attacks. He is from Afghanistan. How about going there (or wherever he is right now...the CIA probably knows anyways) on a search mission? Why kill thousands of innocent people? Thousands were killed on 9/11, and their lives were not more valuable than the others just because they held an American passport....
And as to when we're getting of that sunken ship? My guess is whenever a diplomatically smart president wins an election. Hopefully (*knocks on wood) that is next year's election. Hopefully...
2007-08-01 18:10:02 · answer #1 · answered by cargentina0102 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's not sinking and definitely CANNOT pull out. Where is this defeatist attitude coming from in our country? Since when are we a bunch of wimps that run from a fight? Look, I don't really agree with the way that we went into Iraq and there were a ton of mistakes that were made. Boo-freaking-hoo, can't do anything about that now and there's no use in crying over spilt milk. We have to take the fight to them or we'll be fighting these battles in our streets. I'm assuming that you don't want that...
2007-08-01 21:26:13 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
In order to stabilize Iraq, the US would need at least 200,000 more troops. That will not happen, therefore they need to pull out. Al-Queda attacked the US, Iraq did not. Pick up a book and you will understand this. I don't think George Bush SR, General Schwartzkopf and Colin Powell are liberals, and they were all against invading Baghdad.
2007-08-01 20:36:04 · answer #3 · answered by flagmagnets 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Some of the latest info. has indicated that the ground situation has seen marked improvement since the surge began, all the more reason we CANNOT pullout prematurely. Once things stabilize we can look towards withdrawal. Iraq isnt a "sinking ship", it will be if we pullout at the wrong time. Iraq has done abetter job training and mobilizing their own troops. Much of the regions notorious for attacks has seen activity fall precipitously since the surge. Be patient liberal. Bless our troops.
2007-08-01 20:35:36 · answer #4 · answered by aCeRBic 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋
of course its a sinking ship, we're in the middle of a civil war thats been raging for years.
And we'll never completely leave, we're be there in some capacity forever unfortunately.
2007-08-01 20:48:16 · answer #5 · answered by bigsey93 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Sinking????
It's been laying on the ocean floor for 4 years....
2007-08-01 20:36:44 · answer #6 · answered by Tlfce 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Rats...sinking ship....I get it.
2007-08-01 20:41:59 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, obviously.
And 2009.
2007-08-01 20:32:14 · answer #8 · answered by coragryph 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
you better hope we continue the fight in Iraq, or we will be fighting it here in our own streets
2007-08-01 20:35:51 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Yes, need to wrap it up ASAP!
2007-08-01 20:40:52 · answer #10 · answered by Robin L 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋