I sure hope most of these people are joking sadly I dont have good faith that is the case. what a sad state of affairs we have to see this type of commentary. The one thing I take solice in is that the brave men and women who have given to this country the greatest sacrifice did if for these people to be the way they are and dont take to heart the dissrespect they are shown.
2007-12-26 06:33:23
·
answer #1
·
answered by CaptainObvious 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
No it's not a bit comforting since the outside agitators are not the problem in Iraq.
Iraq is a conflict of wills expressed as both a civil war and a clash of religious beliefs.
Just having some occupation troops keep a lid on a few selected hotspots is hardly a cure for what's coming up next.
Besides, the whole idea of the "surge" was to give the Iraqis some breathing space for political reconciliation, compromise and organization, of which they have exhibited ZERO ability to do so.
America has a hard time learning that you can win a battle and easily lose a war unless your overall strategy is correct.
Given that Iraq is a horrible mistake from the get-go, no one battle or one tactic is going to change the eventual outcome IMO.
The entire reason for being in Iraq is flawed. No good will come of it. It's war without end for us.
Saddam merely suspended the civil war in 1973 with typical Iraqi brutality, until we started it up again.
2007-12-26 06:19:35
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Wow, that is great. So when do we get to bring our people home? Now would be nice since things are so peachy keen over there. Either way the radicals are going to surge again whether we are there or not. They are thinking of new and, probably more deadly, ways to kill and maim Americans. As long as we "infidels" are on their sacred land they can justify such attacks. If we leave than they have no justification and their support falls apart.
2007-12-26 06:36:57
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yes and no.
The problem is that absent some political progress and some settling of the major issues that divide Iraqis this may be only a temporary respite.
Of course I am always happy for a reduction in slaughter and suffering. I just am worried that our feelings of progress may be premature. I continue to root for victory for both our troops and the Iraqi people who deserve better than what they have right now.
2007-12-26 06:18:22
·
answer #4
·
answered by Vince Foster 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
it means nothing unless it is sustained - violence is not finally starting to ease up - it is easing up AGAIN. If violence continues to decline over the next 6-8 months then we can start being hopeful.
2007-12-26 06:15:30
·
answer #5
·
answered by PD 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
No. Not at all. Don't be fooled by the reports on the news. While the violence has gone down, there is still an unacceptable amount. It has gone from worse, to bad. It only means that people will use this as vindication, and we will have a presence there for many years to come. Violence is decreasing, but stability has not filled the gap.
2007-12-26 06:14:54
·
answer #6
·
answered by Vengeful_Hippie (AM) 6
·
3⤊
2⤋
No. comfort starts when Al Queda no longer exist, our troops or home and we have a new President. Republican or Democrat makes no difference just do a good and better job than what I've lived through for the past 8 years.
2007-12-26 06:16:10
·
answer #7
·
answered by honesthustler 3
·
4⤊
0⤋
Comforting, yes, to know that LESS innocent people are being destroyed. But how permanent is the easing and is the light at the tunnel really visible? Time will tell. One can only hope.
2007-12-26 06:17:06
·
answer #8
·
answered by golfer7 5
·
1⤊
2⤋
in a way yes and no. Yes because it shows we've made progress in Iraq but i know that my cousin is right now deployed in Afganistan. So we still have a lot to go in other areas then Iraq
2007-12-26 06:20:30
·
answer #9
·
answered by Poe Boy Ent. 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
How are we really to know that violence is "easing up"? Do you honestly believe what the media spoon feeds you on the news every night?
I will find comfort when this president is out of office.
2007-12-26 06:14:47
·
answer #10
·
answered by sleepingliv 7
·
3⤊
1⤋