I did not agree with the invasion of Iraq and did not agree with how the whole thing whose prosecuted, but the fact of the matter is we are there now, and if we leave, we are going to create a huge mess for the iraqi people and therefore have to see this thing through. Furthermore, if we leave, the terrorists are going to brag about having defeated the USA and this will only encourage them and empower them.
2007-12-08 15:50:29 · 8 answers · asked by ningis n 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I don't see it. Merely a statement of opinion followed by the facts.
2007-12-08 15:57:02 · answer #1 · answered by Roadkill 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The logical flaw is that the mess in Iraq is the doing of the United States--and you are assuming that we, who made the mess, canclean it up. And you are further assuming the Iraqi people cannot do so themselves.
Neither assumption has any evidence to support t. As for the terrorists--we invaded without cause. If we get our butts kicked--or are perceived to have done so--well, tough. What goes around comes around, and we as a country are jsut going to have to take it--and quit destroying a country that never attacked us to avoid accepting the consequences of our actions.
2007-12-08 16:08:11 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
1. if u didnt agree with the invasion of iraq why do u support it now?
2. if the terrorists think allah will "allow them to win" then dont u thik that they think they already won?
3. if we already created a mess for the iraqi people for invading, then you wont solve anything by staying there.
4. if we would simply switch to alternative fuels after funding the corresponding research, the terrorists wont have any way of getting money to build boms in the name of hamas.
afterall this war is about the oil.
5. i saw a couple of grammatical errors which shows how miseducated our leaders can potentially be.
if only we didnt rely on our gov so much this new type of neo-conservative facshism would be less effective.
2007-12-08 16:04:42 · answer #3 · answered by Will the brain 1 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I am having difficulty understanding your question. Foes of the US or not, it seems clear by now that aggression was in fact disguised as preemption. When that which was supposed to have been preempted turned out to be a fallacy, it discredited preemption, aggression, AND political disguisery. Am I close? I'm also having a hard time understanding why anyone would have insulted you for a question like that, but much of what I read here is mysterious to me.....
2016-05-22 06:27:47 · answer #4 · answered by margaretta 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You mean the invasion itself did not create the hugh mess for the Iraqi people. The truth is if we leave then there goes the profits for the weapons industry and other war profiteers.....
2007-12-08 16:10:41 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I could be wrong....
But this is how some people wash their hands of a bad situation.
I bet if the situation was better...they would be bragging about who they approved of it. Are they any better?
Let's be real...Wars are always controversial...no doubt...but to compare this as if it was the greatest atrocity is a far stretch.
America had all the good intentions to bring Iraq to it's knees...The American soldiers had every intent on bringing peace to that country.. They are not mercenaries.
It was extreme Muslims who killed their own...
If they could do that to themselves...think about what they want to do with non-muslims..?
The real threat is not America...wake up to that.
2007-12-08 16:14:11 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
We created a huge mess by invading. We couldn't possibly make it worse by leaving. Terrorists already had the beliefs stated before we invaded, attacked us before we invaded and have been able to recruit more terrorists because we invaded.
2007-12-08 15:55:51 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
the logic flaw is you did not agree but other than that its pretty much dead on.
2007-12-08 22:17:24 · answer #8 · answered by koalatcomics 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋