English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Our generals have been reporting religiously the last few weeks very aggressively that iraq violence is way down, and in fact Congress is poised to provide about 70 billion dollars more to fund our involvement based on what the generals have been saying. So, given that Iraq is this safe now, what's our next move?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071220/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq

2007-12-20 05:39:16 · 9 answers · asked by sergbelxx 1 in Politics & Government Politics

gary, I was asking for your opinion as to what the next move should be. You see gary, some people believe that americans should be able to think independently and not just accept opinions that have been derived for them.

So ...I hope that helps you understand.

2007-12-20 05:51:20 · update #1

9 answers

Safer than NYC is like saying someone is smarter than Forest Gump.

2007-12-20 05:46:11 · answer #1 · answered by Alan S 7 · 0 0

Maybe you should read the story you post....it has the next move in it.......

"Despite a nationwide decrease in violence of nearly 60 percent, Diyala province is still turbulent — largely because militants have been pushed into the area by the summer influx of U.S. troops in Baghdad, a freeze on activities by the Mahdi Army militia and the rise of Sunni anti-al-Qaida "awakening" groups.

"Yes, there are still some very bad things going on in that province," Hertling said. "We are slower in coming around because ... some of the extremists have been pushed east from Anbar province as they've seen the awakening movement there and north from Baghdad as the surge operations took place there."

Hertling noted, however, that the number of roadside bombings against coalition and Iraqi troops in the area had decreased between 40 and 50 percent since the summer. He said there were 849 such attacks in November, compared with 1,698 in June.

But he also warned that al-Qaida in Iraq was still capable of massive violence.

"You know, there's going to be continued spectacular attacks," Hertling said. "We're trying, along with the Iraq army, to protect all the infrastructure of Iraq. These people who are fighting us, who are fighting the Iraqi people, continue to just destroy with no intent to contribute to what Iraq is trying to be."

EDIT: Pretty clearly you do not understand and base a question off a headline to spin a political belief....so I guess

2007-12-20 05:46:26 · answer #2 · answered by garyb1616 6 · 1 0

It's not just the Generals that have reported it, but other independent news soources and Congressman have gone there, as well as the Iraqi government. Have you forgotten that rebuilding takes money and time, or course you did...how soon you forget, Your problem is that you come from a fast food society, a fix it fast up bringing, when the "world:" doesn't work like that. All you see is what CNN and the liberals tell you or show you, and that is death and destruction. How soon you forget how long the world war took (longer) and how soon you forget how long the reconstruction took of those country's (longer), how soon you forget that the battle of Iwo Jima killed 7,000 Marines and 30,000 Japanese in 30 days! How soon you forget that the reconstruction of Japanese took 10 years. How soon you forget that the battle of Stalingrad killed some 3-4 MILLION soldiers and civilians both from Germany and Russia, how soon you forget that the reconstruction of Russia and Germany took decades, how soon you forget that in one battle in Korea that Chinese lost 17,000 troops in less than 15 minutes trying to overrun an artillery unit, and reconstruction is still taking place in North Korea, where people starve to feed their war machine!

In today’s Iraq..2007 we have provided;

Over 4.5 million people have clean drinking water and electricity for the first time ever in Iraq. Over 400,000 kids have up to date immunizations. Over 1500 schools have been renovated and ridded of the weapons that were stored there so education can occur. The port of Uhm Qasar was renovated so grain can be off loaded from ships faster. School attendance is up 80% from levels before the war. The country had it's first 2 billion barrel export of oil last August, considering that Iran Imports most of theirs, this is great. The country now receives 2 times the electrical power it did before the war. 100% of the hospitals are open and fully staffed compared to 35% before the war. Elections are taking place in every major city and city councils are in place. Sewer and water lines are installed in every major city. Over 60,000 police are patrolling the streets. Over 100,000 Iraqi civil defense police are securing the country. Over 80,000 Iraqi soldiers are patrolling the streets side by side with US soldiers. Over 400,000 people have telephones for the first time ever. Students are taught field sanitation and hand washing techniques to prevent the spread of germs. Girls are allowed to attend school for the first time ever in Iraq. Text books that don't mention Saddam are in the schools for the first time in 30 years. There is a newly elected government
There are only two provinces in the entire country that have major insurgent problems, Baghdad and Al-Anbar, the rest secured.

2007-12-20 05:46:48 · answer #3 · answered by oldmarine08 7 · 1 2

I just LOVE these stupid comparisons.

"Iraq vs. New York City"

That's just beautiful.

Here's a hint for you:

IRAQ IS A DISASTER.
IRAQ HAS ALWAYS BEEN A DISASTER.
IRAQ WILL ALWAYS BE A DISASTER.

I double dog DARE you to ask all the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi citizens who have lost their homes (being forced to flee in the night to escape death squads) who have spent all of their life's savings just trying to stay alive for the past four + years... and who now get FOOD BOXES to survive....

Go ahead. I double dog dare you. Ask THEM how great it's going.
****************************
And the "next step" is to get the fvck out of a sovereign nation which NEVER DID A THING TO AMERICA.

That has ALWAYS been the "next step."

2007-12-20 05:50:54 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Bring the troops home and have them protect New York City!

2007-12-20 05:47:11 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

At the height of violence in Baghdad, the city was safer than Detroit.

I think that liberals should abandon New Orleans and LA and let the conservatives "surge" there, too. It seems to work.

2007-12-20 05:45:21 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2 2

To withdraw all troops

2007-12-20 05:45:36 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

safe?
fine....
go there as tourist....
just as you would if you were going to TIMES SQUARE.
mingle with the locals.

2007-12-20 05:47:22 · answer #8 · answered by zuezug 3 · 2 0

really? it's safe? great! bring our troops home!

2007-12-20 05:46:37 · answer #9 · answered by pip 7 · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers