Do Liberals want the military to succeed in Iraq?

Question

I know the liberals politicians don't, but what about the liberal public?
It seems they would rather see defeat, to get one of their own in the oval office.

Beren, the back up for the politicians is obvious. If the US surge works, they will swallow their own tongue, and not have a chance in the election.

Answer 1

While I would never say I was a liberal. I find the label too limiting. I am without a doubt against the war. But I have to tell you that I have no interest in losing. What I am sick and tired of is allowing the incompetents that got us into this mess, to continue throwing our young people at their mistake. We need to stop calling each other names like liberal and neo con, and get together on this thing. Mr Bush has had more then enough time to settle this. I want someone that has a clue to take over this war, and finish it. We look weak and uncommitted in the eyes of the world. And that my friends is not helping us with the extremists that are starting to think they can take us on.

Answer 2

you need to understand how liberals think. This is what they are taking in.
We have the pentagon saying that because we are in iraq, we are less safe.
we have the white house saying there are more terrorist attacks world wide since the invasion of iraq then before.
we have the hlsd saying the numbers of terrorist in the united states is on the rise.
we have the white house saying that alquida is gaining strength world wide since the invasion of iraq.

the logical solution to these things, is to leave iraq...

however, they dont understand the implications of what happens if we leave.
the mujihadeen fighters (the precursor to alquida) gained political strength and support because they defeated the soviets.. the bigger, more sophisticated military. That caused them to become emboldened.. and this is what the liberals dont understand.
I truly believe they want to protect the military by bringing them home.. they cant imagine giving up human lives to make us less safe.
but, if you look at what the liberal politicians are doing, they are putting things in place to strengthen the security of this country (all of the 911 commissions recommendations), so they can pull the troops out of iraq.. and this is kinda like... 'were going to hope the protections in place are going to be better.. but we wont really know until something happens'..
this is the grey area...
if we pull out of iraq, after the implementations are in place, will that be enough to keep us safe?
and thank you for asking a question that made sense.. the last part was a bit of a poke, but it was a good question.

Answer 3

Yes liberals want the U.S. to succeed in Iraq. However, they just realize that because of things like inadequate planning by the Bush Administration, a too broad definition of what "success" is, and how the occupying of a foreign nation obviously creates hatred toward the U.S. on the part of the country's citizens that it is highly unlikely that success will be achieved.

By the way, over 70% of the American people now oppose the war in Iraq. 70& of the American people aren't liberals, so it seems there's a big whole in your argument.

Answer 4

Define success. In my opinion, success is being able to bring our troops home because Iraq has pulled their government together enough to stand on their own two feet. It is impossible for us to win another country's civil war.
I don't know of one liberal that would "rather see defeat to get one of their own in the oval office". We just want our soldiers and Iraqi soldiers to stop dying on a daily basis. If it took a republican, I'd be all over it. Just bring the troops home now.

Answer 5

i doubt it is defeat. But then again I am not a liberal. I am defiantely not a neo-con, but not a liberal. Well I hope the troops were not there in the 1st place.

you may want to go check this group out I found: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/isaveamerica/

it appears to have some good discussion starting regardles of political orientation.

Answer 6

I think if the war would have been at all legitimate and not a political game, your question would be answerable. Your question is asked under the assumption that this war is legitimate and moral. I don't ever want to see our country fail in a task (I don't think any American who remotely cares for his/her country wants failure) but what is victory in this war? I don't believe Iraq will be stable in my lifetime with or without our military presence.

Answer 7

This liberal wants to see "success" better defined in the first place. Our goal was to make sure there were no WMD's. We did that, and ousted Saddam Hussein as well. But that was years ago. Now we're policing a civil war, and I'm not sure how long we should keep losing brave soldiers to doing that. Certainly we owe the Iraqis something for having helped create this problem. But we also need to have an exit strategy. To me, a successful exit strategy is the opposite of "defeat."

I don't care if it happens before or after the elections, as long as I have faith that it's going to happen in a reasonable timeframe. Our current president (Mr. "Mission Accomplished") refuses to even consider an exit strategy, so I have no confidence in him at all.

ETA: I also have little confidence in people who say "those liberals want...." (fill in the blank). We liberals know our own mind more than do the people demonizing us.

Answer 8

Abuse, abuse, abuse. Easier than actually debating issues I know but nowhere near as effective.
This sort of refusal to accept that Americans overwhelmingly disagreed with you, cost you a real pants kicking in 2006. I am just thrilled to see that so few on the right have learnt anything from it.

Answer 9

Democrats or Liberals, whichever wants the US to lose the war in Iraq. Obama wants to take on Pakistan. What's the point is pulling out of Iraq if we just take the war to Pakistan? Hilliary want to take on Iran. They are a problem too but again, what's the use if we pull out of Iraq?
Want to win the Iraq war? Withdraw from the Geneva Convention and change the rules of engagement to allow our troops to take whatever action is necessary to win.

Answer 10

Well since Bush never sent enough troops into Iraq to finish the job in the 1st place & he still doesn't have enough (even w/ his Surge) to secure the Iraq borders (where terrorists & their supplies stream into Iraq) I'd say Bush has never really wanted to win the war or else he would have started up a US Draft.

He's also doing an excellent job of helping Hillary get into the White House by the complete mess he has created in Iraq.