2007-08-01 18:27:44 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Phased withdrawal over the next year -- rotate out each unit as its tour of duty comes to an end and don't rotate new units in -- down to the last 20K or so which would required a planned withdrawal along with civilians.
That gives us about a 8 months to figure out how to achieve that final withdrawal with minimum casualties. And it puts pressure on the Iraqi govt to step up or shut up.
After units have rested and re-equipped, send them after specific known terrorist camps -- starting with Al Qaeda headquarters.
Or better yet, use our superior air and missile capability to eliminate these camps, and only send our troops in afterwards to verify kills.
2007-08-01 18:32:02 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 2⤊ 4⤋
As far as leaving Iraq, the US must make the commitment of redeploying the troops at any cost. The only way to help Iraq is by admitting that going there was a mistake. This would be the only way to begin regaining the US's credibility with the rest of the world. And the only way to get Iraq on track is to get the rest of the world involved. When the rest of the world is able to benefit from Iraq's liberation, then they will be involved. Not even US citizens benefit from their liberation, therein lies why most US citizens are against the war.
As for Bin Laden. The only way to capture him is to go through the Saudi royal family. And we all know that the Bush administration has too many ties with the Saudi's. There is no way that can of worms will be opened while Bush is in the White House. The best strategy for finding him is to wait till Bush is out of office and we elect a leader that isn't a puppet for the Big Oil corporations. After all, Bush did say about going after Bin Laden, "I don't know where he is. I really don't think about him much."
sfm
2007-08-01 18:40:13 · answer #2 · answered by sixfingeredman 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The war would end sooner if terrorists actually used their brains and relized we arnt leaving by them contantly attacking our troops. If they stopped and let The troops and Iraq government do thier jobs then the US will be able to leave faster. Then again the terrorists want the war to go on. They said themselves that a US troop pullout would deprive them of killing more Americans. The terrorists are enjoying the war. The longer they can keep us there the more US soldiers they can kill, the longer we are there the more funding they will get from countries who hate us and and more people will join their cause because they are getting angrier and angrier over us being there.
The war is just going to go on and on until the terrorists call a cease fire. The best strategy for finding Bin Laden would have been for Clinton to have done something about him when he had the chance. Bin Laden was in custody of another country for awhile and offered him to Former Pres Clinton, Clinton chose to view Bin Laden as too little of a threat to worry about.
2007-08-01 20:14:51 · answer #3 · answered by Catelyn O 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't think we can leave. What we'll probably have to do is triple our troop strength there, remove the present Iraqi government, and put in our own people, much as we did in Japan after World War II. With luck, the oil revenues will pay for our efforts.
There's no particular reason to locate Mr. bin Ladin. He's not giving orders to anyone now, and there's no particular reason to make a martyr out of him. Al Qaeda doesn't have infinite resources, and they're spending a good deal of money protecting ol' Osmosis. May they continue to stay distracted with him.
George W Bush is as dumb as that god-awful group of bogus intellectuals who supported him, but he seems to have blundered into a war we were probably going to have gotten into sooner than later. Once we get him and his crew back to their small-town real-estate offices we can go about dealing with the fundamentalist Moslem threat like grown-ups.
2007-08-01 18:44:38 · answer #4 · answered by 2n2222 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Obama says he would invade Pakistan for bin Laden. Pakistan refuses to give us permission to search their remote mountain areas near the Afghani border.
If Obama were elected and invaded Pakistan, I wonder if all the libs would call him a "war monger." My guess is, they'd just keep their traps shut.
cora's plan for leaving Iraq would be disasterous. We need to stay, but if we had to leave, it would be better to pull them all out at once rather than little by little. Under that "plan" the terrorists and insurgents would gain strength and our troops would be ridiculously vulnerable.
2007-08-01 18:33:26 · answer #5 · answered by SW1 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Oil Iraq Invaded Kuwait Giving them administration of the Oil Tanker shops 2 conflict stabilize Iraq so the Oil can circulate and 3 returned and four returned and 5 returned all to be certain the Oil interior the midsection east Flows easily and it has labored the value of oil has dropped international huge
2016-10-13 11:09:33 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Bin Laden will die sooner than later. He is not a priority any more.
Leaving Iraq: No matter what, America will lose. Either leaving now or staying there, it is an eternal quagmire.
2007-08-01 18:30:01 · answer #7 · answered by PSU840 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Wait til Bush leaves Office...-& invite Bin Laden to sing on American Idol. 20 to 1 he shows up, & Simon complains he can't sing! :)
2007-08-01 18:32:40 · answer #8 · answered by Joseph, II 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't agree with the war in Iraq...But unfortunately we may never leave...
2007-08-01 19:29:24 · answer #9 · answered by ~*Zaidens Mommy*~ 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nuclear Weapons on the following targets:
The Middle East
France
Game, Set, Match
2007-08-01 18:29:57 · answer #10 · answered by Medic 3 · 2⤊ 6⤋