From what i've heard, they were told we were there to free the Iraqi people and that's what they'll believe untill every last one of our men are killed.
this whole terrorist thing is a sham, the word terrorist is deceptive due to the fact that they are simply patriots, fighting for their own countries after we'd been screwing with and trying to control them since the 1980s. we were asked to leave for so long, but we just HAD to keep getting involved
in the middle east for some reason........(securing our countries access to cheap oil)
duh, why do we let the arabs do what ever they want to their women, children, and religous rivals?
because they let us buy cheap oil, and station military bases on their soil for us to be able to threaten any other middle eastern countries who don't do what we say.
oh yeah, and the idea that they "deserve to be brought into the 21st century is so wrong.
no one deserves anything they won't fight for themselves.
2007-11-17 14:31:48
·
answer #1
·
answered by Jennifer 2
·
2⤊
9⤋
Considering the WTC disaster wasn't an inside job:
I think having our forces there keeps terrorist groups from being able to assemble and concentrate on their next attack on US soil. Kind of keeping them running and in turmoil is good.
I also think we are only delaying the inevitable though. As soon as we pull out of Iraq the groups will be able to get together and plan their next attack.
Again, all this is considering the WTC disaster wasn't an inside job.
Furthermore, all of you idiots saying this is because of oil are F-ing morons.
Do you not know about all of the research and work going into finding alternative energy sources to power future America? Hydrogen, solar power, bio-diesel, etc.? There is currently an all electric car that can go some 245+ miles on a charge and 0-60 in under 4 seconds. It costs less than 2 cents a mile to operate. Check out teslamotors.com.
And to those of you who will say, "oh but what about the need to make the electricity to charge them, blah blah blah". We have coal, wind generated electricity, and solar power (you could charge the car by solar or wind power for free). Also, it wouldn't take near the amount of coal to produce the electricity to charge it as the amount of oil it would require to make the gasoline to give it the same power.
2007-11-17 14:38:55
·
answer #2
·
answered by jaengee84 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
I can't even remember what the current excuse....ohh I mean reason for being in the war right now...It was first WMD's, then Saddam was a sadistic dictator, abusing his people, then to free the Iraq people of oppression, then to stabilize so Iraq can take control, then to ride all the insurgents, then somewhere in between all those, to control oil and help finance the war....Now, I have no clue, other than to keep our soldiers in harms way....but I guess since we f**ked up someone else's house, we have to stick around until it's rebuilt and clean for occupancy huh....great....
Maybe they should make a reality show from the Iraq war and just start voting off soldiers...that might be one way to get our brave soldiers home and earn back some of that lost Billions that the government can't account for ....
2007-11-17 15:07:40
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
I support the war for freedom. The war that will give our children and the children of millions of Iraqis the right to live in peace, and not worry if when they go to bed that that's the last time they'll see their parents. I support the war to keep our way of living. I support the war to defend our very way of life.
2007-11-17 18:53:54
·
answer #4
·
answered by KungFuKricket 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Politicians understand a thanks to shop a warfare going. prevalent understand a thanks to end one. Take this warfare out of the hands of the Politicians positioned it interior the hands of the Generals and this warfare will be over presently. If it had no longer been for Eisenhower and MacArthur we'd want to nevertheless be combating WW II. Having a Commander and chief that has no military experience for the duration of a warfare is like having a pee wee football league quarter decrease back interior the great Bowl. evidence of that is by ability of searching on the prevailing commander and chief and observe the mess he has gotten us into and what LBJ did in Vietnam.
2016-10-24 10:27:46
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
i was talking to my uncle about this , who is in the army and just came back, what people have to understand is that the government has several good reasons to stay, otherwise they would bring them back, one of the reasons is, well quite frankly, their (the iraqi) government is not strong enough to suppport itself, the military is still being trained, the people over there have no work ethic at all, they work just enough to get by and take the rest of the week off, and since thy cannot be fired (because all of the people are like this), they are planning for the next generation to come up and build good work ethic, another reason is we are calling the terrorists out on their own home turf, and they are too lilly livered to come out and fight like men against the USA, and they will try to take it back as soon as we leave, so we really need to strengthen the military over there before we leave have fun on that paper, hope this answered some of your questions
2007-11-17 14:38:17
·
answer #6
·
answered by brandon p 2
·
3⤊
0⤋
The first and most desirable outcome would be to have a unified Middle East with more moderate governance. The only two countries that have stood against us for the most part have been Iraq and Iran - Libya conceded a long time ago.
Having Iraq in moderate hands would put pressure on Iran and Pakistan to become less hyperbolic and vitriolic in their approaches to their neighbors.
Finally, this more moderate stance would help to eliminate the radical extremists as they would not be tolerated by their fellow countrymen.
2007-11-17 14:33:57
·
answer #7
·
answered by ChaseFranklin 3
·
2⤊
2⤋
No body supports this war. This war is not about oil.It is about redirecting the Muslim terrorists to another country ( IRAQ ) of whom needed to get rid a brutal dictator for a free country.A country that the military had no doubt we could beat and help
the citizens take over their country.We must fight them there or at home, your choice.
2007-11-17 14:37:45
·
answer #8
·
answered by messinger1965 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
A middle eastern state in the western liberal model. After all, it's spent decades in the Soviet Stalin model. It would be beneficial to the Iraqis, it would be beneficial to the world and beneficial to us. Iraq and the islamic world deserve to be brought into the twentyfirst century.
2007-11-17 15:24:36
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
An Iraq with a democratic republic, NOT a democracy.
Less shelter for terrorists.
2007-11-17 14:44:04
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The spread of liberal democracy. Note the prefix "liberal" - the supporters of the war do not want to see the election of extremist political groups. Not only would this go against US geopolitical interests (in terms of influence in the middle-east) but in terms of the spread of liberal beliefs and values.
2007-11-17 16:11:35
·
answer #11
·
answered by Mike K 1
·
0⤊
0⤋