I agree with Rudi and Mary, Mary: I was in 'Nam. War is the culprit, the way to stop the innocents from being harmed is not to be there.
So, we take the Army out, then what? The rebels take over, we all know what happens then, the ones they don't like they simply slit their throats and make no excuses for it. They take great aims to make a pleasure out of it.
Now what, there's no one to stop them, now what are the "goodie two shoes saying" "someone has to go in and stop them"
I agree with them but, what's the answer, let them run wild? isn't it a catch 22 situation? what's the answer? let's hear it.
2007-10-11 23:26:06
·
answer #1
·
answered by cowboydoc 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
What this is actually showing now that theres more of an urgency from soldiers to go after suspected terrorists....
to the point its reckless at times.
Once this surge was set forward and completed, the army has no more excuses as they claimed the surge isnt even fullycomplete.
Now it is, and thy are blood thirsty for results.
Its just yet another suscioon that raises the doubt is America in Iraq for true intentions.
And no one say they are responsible for 9/11
Centralized al alqueda in Pakistan is.
Al Queda in Iraq couldnt harm the U.S. even if they wanted to.
Its a primitive group thats simply a collective group of resistence citizens that are mimicing the Real Alqueda.
But they are not a threat to the U.S.
This terrible foreign policy is more a threat to Americas safety than any other group or country out there.
2007-10-11 20:50:28
·
answer #2
·
answered by writersbIock2006 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
As an ex-serviceman who was in combat in Viet-
nam where many innocent lives were lost also,
the reason is WAR. There is no such thing as
control or who gets killed. That is why WAR should
never occur. Bush has used the excuse of
Terroism to start a war and now we are stuck with
fighting a loosing battle. There is no way we will
win in Irag as the country will never let us win. Bush
will always say things are improving but as an
ex-combat veteran I know better. Hopefully the
only end result will be that we get out and bring
our troops home.
2007-10-11 21:09:30
·
answer #3
·
answered by RudiA 6
·
3⤊
0⤋
In parliament Sunday, Iraqi officers stated the opportunity of putting regulations on U.S. protection rigidity operations in Iraq while theynegotiate the words of the United countries determination that authorizes the U.S. presence right here. The determination comes up for its annual reauthorization previously year's end Iraqi best Minister Nouri Maliki issued a fact annoying that the U.S. not use such overwhelming rigidity in pursuing objectives, and that it further coordinate its efforts with Iraqi forces. He suggested the government might habit an examine of the Sadr city incident. In Najaf, Sheik Salah Ubaidi, a spokesman for Sadr, who has stated as for close to-term rapprochement with the U.S., suggested: "We denounce those acts. we've not got any selection yet to denounce. we've grown drained from the numerous denouncements we've made." The Iraqi indoors Ministry, which oversees the Iraqi police rigidity, suggested 13 civilians have been killed and sixty 9 wounded. The U.S. protection rigidity issued 2 statements wherein the completed form of ineffective grew to 40 9 from six. officers did not clarify how they arrived on the casualty figures or clarify the discrepancy between their finished and that of the Iraqi government. a protection rigidity spokesman suggested there have been no U.S. casualties interior the incident.
2016-10-22 03:01:31
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Why were the baddies hiding behind civilians and kids then?
Hmm you need to ask the baddies why they do this sort of sh*t and end up getting everyone in front of them killed.
It's a bad mad world.
Jen'Ari - above. What? They do not say the children and women are terrorists. You have interpreted that incorrectly. sorry.
2007-10-11 22:12:56
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Salafist Jihadists are known for using women and children as human shields. It might be the case here. They also adhere to the doctrine of "takfir" which says it's O.K., in the carrying of Jihad for Muslim to kill Muslim.
I suspect, as time passes, that the scenario of the terrorists using these children as human shield will be validated. But, don't hold your breath waiting for the AP to do a follow-up stating that.
2007-10-11 19:52:29
·
answer #6
·
answered by desertviking_00 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
All bloodshed is totally unnecessary, but this is war and people die, i hate it and wish our soldiers could come home,
we got involved in something we had no business to. Brown should recall our troops long before Summer 2008.
2007-10-11 19:20:14
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Alot of threat. Iraq was a training ground to the terrorists. Saddam supported them monetarily. Any unstable country in the middle east is a threat to the US. Only thing I have to say is don't listen to only what the media tells you. There are great things happening over there, and believe it or not. That country is no longer the threat that it was before the war.
2007-10-11 19:28:44
·
answer #8
·
answered by mandi2004_03 2
·
1⤊
4⤋
"I Want Nothing But The Ending Of The War"
2007-10-11 20:09:50
·
answer #9
·
answered by Eagles Fly 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Good point, but the US is listening to no one, only the sloshing of all that lovely oil into the tankers.
2007-10-12 00:43:04
·
answer #10
·
answered by James Mack 6
·
0⤊
0⤋