English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

...he made his now infamous photo-op speech? You know? The "Mission Accomplished" one?

2007-08-27 02:37:30 · 11 answers · asked by Brotherhood 7 in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

11 answers

Iraq war was afailed war when the first troop was lost. When one is killed for vain is is horible. My brhter and 3650 or so more trops have died in vain.

No one understands the pain we have losing a loved one so unnecessarily.

I just wish no more would die in vain. troops are family members. Tehy are people we love and they love us. Tehy are not empty numbers that just die.

We msis my brother so much. I am so sorry for his life bing thown away so early. I am so sorry for the other troops ant their families. no one understands the pain this.

I wihs none of you have to go though haveng to burry a loved one for this war.

2007-08-27 02:57:51 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

I did not support starting the war, but our "occupation" of the Kurdish region for the ten years before the war should have been instructive.

The occupied people will probably tolerate or even appreciate an occupation if they perceive that they are better off than they were before the war.

The Kurds felt this and were glad we were there protecting them from Saddam.

The rest of Iraqis aren't because they can't flush their toilet, turn on the lights or AC, find their grandma under the rubble from the last airstrikes, or be sure that their kids can come home from school alive or even go to school. How long would Americans put up with that? Two days? Three?

Bush's hands were tied to some extent though because doing an occupation that Iraqis approved of would conflict the primary goal of the war: giving most of Iraq's oil to major oil corporations and rewriting Iraq's oil law to suit them.

Iraqis are dragging their feet on passing the law not because of how it divides the oil income between ethnic groups, but because it gives over 80% of the oil income to big oil companies and leaves just 20% for the Iraqis to divide among themselves. Those companies would be taking the one thing of value in the country and giving the Iraqis the equivalent of a tip instead of a fair share.

Here's what Iraqis think of Bush's oil law:
http://handsoffiraqioil.blogspot.com/

OIL MOTIVE for Iraq War resources
http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2006/09/iraq-oil-war-resources.html

2007-08-27 02:53:42 · answer #2 · answered by yurbud 3 · 3 1

I would say the planning broke down after Saddam was captured. That did seem to be the short term goal, for whatever reason everyone neglected the nation building part of the plan. With Saddam captured and his government overthrown, no one predicted a long drawn out insurgency that remains to this day.

Actually: when the "No WMD in Iraq" report came out, people really starting questioning when this thing was going to be over, and what the remaining goals are. The other stated goals were simple: find Saddam, overthrow his government, find the WMD. After those three were accomplished, rebuilding Iraq was such a multistage ordeal that it's not easy to assess progress.

2007-08-27 02:42:21 · answer #3 · answered by Pfo 7 · 5 0

Can you people ever stop the "Bush lied" falsehood? Why must you use lies as supporting arguments for your beliefs?

It isn't a "failed war", either.

What people like you fail to realize (it requires thinking, which is probably why) is that there really was no government structure at all after Saddam was toppled. No uncorrupt government on any level, no police force that wasn't inept and corrupt, no army cadre that wasn't corrupt lackeys of Saddam, etc.

It's very difficult to fathom such a thing, the complete absence of any responsible governmental authority.

Add to that the unimaginable terrorist violence directed against the Iraqi people by the insurgents and the foreign terrorists, and you have a very difficult situation. And yes, nobody could have anticipated the level of terrorist violence against the people - because the world has never seen that level of mindless violence ever.

That said, the accomplishments over the past 4 1/2 years has been remarkable. A constitution, a democratically elected representative government, a police force and a military all created from scratch. People who have a knowledge of history know how very astonishing such progress really is.

I find the sophomoric mouthings of the anti-Bushies to illustrate their collective ignorance.

2007-08-27 02:59:50 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

conflict is often political. Mismanagement has brought about a great mess so a techniques, whether it is common for counterinsurgency operations to take ten years or extra and have an ebb and bypass. the massive question now's whether we've a great adequate military to do the interest. Cuts in power and will improve in commitments have been the norm via fact the elder Bush, and frequently formerly that.

2016-10-17 02:36:51 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Iraq is not a failed war. It is a won war. It was won when the objectives were met. The Hussein regime was driven out and free, democratic election were held to create a new government. The failure is only in not allowing the elected Iraqi government to govern the nation it was elected to head.

2007-08-27 03:00:45 · answer #6 · answered by fangtaiyang 7 · 1 2

The Iraq war was a failed war in 1994.. according to Cheney....check out the link...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YENbElb5-xY

2007-08-27 02:44:33 · answer #7 · answered by jen_zen1950 2 · 2 1

Nope. There is a difference between "Mission accomplished" and "The war is over." The particular mission he referred to was accomplished. A single bombing run over enemy targets is a mission, if you complete it and destroy the target that mission is accomplished.

2007-08-27 02:44:53 · answer #8 · answered by Robert P 5 · 0 3

"Let every nation know whether it wishes us well or ill that we will pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe in order to assure the survival and success of liberty. "

JFK

2007-08-27 02:45:11 · answer #9 · answered by ? 6 · 3 0

It was when the American people refused to protect their families after 911.

2007-08-27 03:14:19 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers