Certainly there are critics and proponents from both sides, but doesn't it seem more like a catch 22? Obviously one side will not be appeased with the decision to either stay or go.
While I would assume most Americans want the troops brought home, and I certainly do, there are too many adverse effects that would equate to an unstable government.
Then pro-war activists will claim it's a success. I agree to an extent that it is, but longterm occupation obviously is not going to work either.
How do YOU choose whether to stay or go?
2007-09-03 09:59:42 · 11 answers · asked by Glen B 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Yaktur; well obviously we should not have entered Iraq, but it's a little late now.
2007-09-03 10:22:37 · update #1
Hindsight is 20/20. I'm not asking what we should have done.
2007-09-03 10:23:12 · update #2
Yes and that's exactly the reason some of us were against ever going in all along.This quagmire was predictable like none other than Dick Cheney explains here very accurately
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BEsZMvrq-I
The situation now is that the damage is done.If America leaves there probably will be bloodshed but that will not change by staying longer.If you stay six months longer the bloodshed will begin six months later.If you stay for a year longer,the bloodshed will begin a year later.You get the idea.
If you go now Iraqi's have the best chance to stand up and get whatever needs to take place before they are capable of running their own country again as fast as possible and US soldiers will no longer have to loose their lives to protect the ego of the pseudo Christian in the white house.
2007-09-03 10:09:40 · answer #1 · answered by justgoodfolk 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
which statement is true? obama wouldn't have gotten any farther than he could've b/c he's black OR obama got as far as he b/c he was black the 2nd one is TRUE... why? look at john edwards.. white man.. he was nothing special but b/c hilllary is female and obama is black... this gives people a feeling of defintinte change in America but obama isn't anything special at all! he has no experience in foreign policy.. we are in serious need of someone who know about this kind of thing! Hillary knows what she is doing... and so does mccain (you cant deny the both of them.. no matter what party you are). sure he is a DYNAMIC speaker.... but so were all the tyrants... how do you think hitler got in the position he did? Germany, like america was going through some tough times during the 1930s .. nad hitler spoke to them as if he could relate to them (which he did.. hilter lived in the streets at one point and his mother died when he was young.. he was an unloved child).. yeha i'm not trying to say that obama is a tyrant.. i 'm just trying to make the point that.. just b/c a person is a brlliant speaker doesn't mean they would make a good leader AMERICA NEEDS TO CONSIDER WHY WE ARE VOTING FOR OBAMA!
2016-05-20 05:23:05 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The choice is easy. It was a criminal act from the beginning and it's a crime in process. It must be stopped.
If it were legal, the congress would have approved it and declared war as required by the Constitution.
And this is viewed under the US law. From a moral point of view, it's wrong, it was wrong and will be wrong. It must be stopped.
2007-09-03 10:14:04 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The US should NEVER have entered Iraq in the first place.
And adding more and more soldiers will only fuel the hatred against American policy.
There is nothing constructive about war and destruction.
If Bush & co had any feelings or morals, they would let the Iraqi people alone and stop killing them, stop stealing their oil and let them form their own government as the Iraqi people see fit.
But Bush & co don't have any feelings or morals except greed so what you see is what you get.
2007-09-03 10:04:13 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
i dont know why people call this a War i see it as AID iraq is a country w/o a leader and a working government they need time setting this up and keeping the bad guys out the troops wanna stay and get the job done liberals need to shut up their b*tching it isnt going to bring them any back faster so stfu!!!!!
btw we are damned if we do and damned if we dont it pisses me off
2007-09-03 10:07:47 · answer #5 · answered by nannymandy3 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Defeat retreat the lib= way>?If not for the 08 election this would not be an issue>?An Bash Bush for there choice of cut & run>
2007-09-03 10:07:43 · answer #6 · answered by 45 auto 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Most definitely. Its Vietnam all over again. At least if we pull out a few lives may be saved and a few kids may keep their fathers
2007-09-03 10:06:33 · answer #7 · answered by Ferret 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
We are trying to create a democracy in the Middle East. If we pulled out now all of our work would be ruined.
2007-09-03 10:05:19 · answer #8 · answered by RedWhite&Blue 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋
We wouldn't be damned at all right now if we had listened to Hans Blix and the UN and simply not invaded Iraq.
2007-09-03 10:04:57 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
I should to pull out our soldiers right this minute and bring them home to their families.
2007-09-03 10:10:01 · answer #10 · answered by Cool Dogg Ringer 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋