The military presence is needed indefinitely, everyone knows if the US leaves then Turkey may attack the Kurds, a civil war will break out with the sunnies and the Shiites and who knows what the other bordering countries may do seeing an opportunity arise. Iraq has oil, lots of it...every neighboring country would want it for themselves if they could.
Is there any light at the end of this tunnel? Will Iraq be strong enough to work together and defend itself?
2007-11-25
03:01:16
·
17 answers
·
asked by
Edge Caliber
6
in
Politics & Government
➔ Other - Politics & Government
Spock (rhp) the troops in Germany were there during peace for the last 60 years, not constant war...theres a big difference.
2007-11-25
03:08:50 ·
update #1
anti-Islamic? Why did that get thrown in there lol
2007-11-25
03:09:35 ·
update #2
Call it a win and get out!
2007-11-25 03:03:46
·
answer #1
·
answered by zorglub 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
Well the problem is that we supported making this one country when we drew the borders up . When in reality it is 3 territories along tribal boundaries.
Another reason I vote for A Non-Interventionalist Policy.
Another reason I am voting for Ron Paul.
Yes are records in undeclared wars is No Wins. Next time Declare War. Constitutionally through congress. Stop skirtting things like a car salesmen.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/war-and-foreign-policy/
Yes Spock that is the problem. The American TaxPayer is getting tired of supporting bases in countries from 50 years ago. Let Koreans defend Korea Let german defend Germany, Let Japan defend Japan, Entangling Alliances is against the Bulk of Our history as a nation we need to get out of Nato. Why is American Blood being Shed to defend countries half way around the World that most Americans do not even know the name of . We should not be supporting Iraq either, these countries should all be supporting themselves. The United States Of America is not supposed to be World Policing and starting Pre Emptive Wars. What about this is hard to understand. We are buying silence and swords and the loyalty of those who will try to kill us when we stop subsidizing them.
2007-11-25 03:06:19
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Iraq as well as so many of it's muslim neighbours, all
want control of wealth and religion, it's a power struggle!
for reign. I have to stay optmistic that one day some
group will take charge, but with long years of fighting, until
the winner takes it all. In the mean time Military presence
will only help to keep some kind of order, and it's their
duty to do that. One day they all will have to back off! and
let somebody be the ruling party, good or not! "Every frog
is a prince in his own pool!" Democracy is not culture, in
those regions, then! there's nothing to restore, when it's not
a way of life, One has to live the life they
were born into, adjusting, sometimes can cause more
problems. Have a nice day!
2007-11-25 03:22:07
·
answer #3
·
answered by Joan Sandverysmart 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
At the present time, it is impossible for us to achieve "victory" in Iraq. This is true simply because we refuse to define what would constitute victory.
If victory means that we beat the military or depose Saddam, we've already won. On the other hand, if victory means that we force every living soul in Iraq to bow down to U.S. superiority, we can never win. That will never happen. It would never happen in any nation, and to seek that goal is foolish and arrogant.
As Ronald Reagan, our last truly great president, learned, the problems in the Middle East cannot be solved by superior military power. The sooner we learn that, the sooner we can recover our national greatness. We cannot solve the problems in Iraq (or anywhere else). Iraq must solve their own problems. They don't need our occupation forces to do so.
2007-11-25 03:11:52
·
answer #4
·
answered by skip742 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
i think of the victory replaced into combating an Al-Qaeda takeover, and ending sectarian violence. Al-Qaeda in Iraq is relatively destroyed, and there ultimately seems some degree of peace between the Iraqi government and the Sadrists. Now, we are able to progressively draw down our troop tiers. we've relatively already achieved this victory. that isn't WW2. we're not celebrating VJ day with parades interior the streets. we are quietly making waiting to flow away.
2016-10-18 01:59:25
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Good question. If a liberal wins office, then we will be pulled out of Iraq, and, no, Iraq will not be strong enough to defend itself, and this war would have just been a big waste of time. Hopefully though, we will have a good president and stay in the war long enough for Iraq to be stable.
2007-11-25 03:08:32
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
There has be a huge drop in violence in Iraq in the past few months. So much that more than 1,000 Iraqi citizens are returning to the country. They are making improvements, but maybe the federal government needs to give up more control to local governments
2007-11-25 03:05:31
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Victory in Iraq has always been allowing individual freedoms for the Iraqis. Do you remember the purple fingers after the Iraqis voted? That is the miracle that President Bush has allowed to spawn and grow in Iraq. Remember that our own Constitution was not written until 1787, this was 11 years after we won/declared our Independence from England in 1776. We helped the Iraqis win their Independence from Hussein who was a tyrannical dictator. We need to have patience as the Iraqis begin to experience their new-found freedom. The Islam religion is based upon fear. The Iraqis want freedom-their actions have shown it. Check out the sites that I've listed and you'll see the awesome progress that we've accomplished in Iraq!
2007-11-25 03:19:18
·
answer #8
·
answered by Common Sense! 2
·
2⤊
2⤋
Victory has already been achieved.Saddam has been deposed and his armies destroyed.
Democracy has now been installed.It is the acorn from which the mighty oak tree grows.
No fledgling nation is without teething troubles.In some events this has taken hundreds of years.That is for the people of Iraq to decide how quickly they desire peace.
As long as Iran is sending suicide bombers and weapons into Iraq,then longer it will take for peace.
Usa and england need to maintain a presence in Iraq for as long as it takes to prevent its implosion or invasion.
2007-11-25 04:17:27
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Didn't the President put this to bed when he landed on the aircraft carrier with the million dollar photo-op and said that the war was mission accomplished.Oh yea, how many soldiers and civilians have died since then?
2007-11-25 03:30:20
·
answer #10
·
answered by ? 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
The problem is the military has it's hands tied. They can't perform the job they should be doing because idiot politicians have placed controls upon the military. If we were at war the politicians couldn't do this and we would smash all resistance into oblivion. So blame your political leaders for their mistakes here, not the military.
2007-11-25 03:11:04
·
answer #11
·
answered by aswkingfish 5
·
3⤊
1⤋