Do you think Afganhistan war was the last resort?(explain with reasons)?
460548
The only reason we went to Afghanistan was to build an oil pipeline that ran through the country.\n\nRESPONSE TO DIE-HARD REPUBLICAN - So if a US. terrorist bombed a building in Saudi Arabia and he lived in our country, and we refused to let the Saudi Government handle it, should they bomb our entire country and turn it into liquid sh*t?
1071851
i think its a difficult issue. i think that we are in the war for the wrong reasons, but i think the war is necessary. the us being on a different continent than most major wars has always been torn between getting involved and isolationism. we dont always make the right call. i think that the people in iraq and the surrounding regions needed help. needed military assistance. not to make way for democracy or any of that crap. but because of massive human rights violations. thats not why we got into the war of course, but its certainly a beneficial side effect. the us didnt get into WWII to liberate the concentration camps, and stop the slaughter of innocent people all over europe, but again, a positive side effect. so maybe it doesnt matter what reason we go in for, as long as the right thing gets done. the civilian casualties are appalling. but they are mostly due to the iraqi insurgency. of course the iraqi insurgency would not have happened if we hadnt gotten involved, because their aims were being accomplished by saddam hussein. and they'll be there when we leave. i dont know that the middle east is actually a good place for democracy. they evolved differently than america and europe. they may require a different form of government. in the end i dont care. the people will decide, and it will be bloody and violent, as it always is. most really important decisions are. but i think its probably time we got out. but as long as we helped people who needed it, maybe its not such a bad thing we got involved. and before you ask, yes i believe that our next stop should be darfour, and the other places in africa where appalling genocide is taking place. it seems we cant win. some countries tell us to mind our own business. others ask us where the hell we were when they were in trouble. like i said. its complex. i dont think theres a right answer.
854066
Yes, but not a very good one. When was the last time they won a shooting war without the help of the Soviet Union, Britain and Australia? I know about Grenada; I mean against a real army.
628138
Yes, knowing what we know now, this wasn't the solution.\nMuch more could have been achieved with less loss of lives and resources.\nThe real problem with Iraq is yet to emerge. This country is in complete disarray, there is nothing left. the moment the Americans leave, a civil war will break out, because there is no dominating or controlling force. In a normal revolution there is an organization, a plan, a people movement. Ideals, a bigger picture. But here?\nA better way would have been to work from the inside,to start up a movement, to feed them money, structure. To let that movement gain momentum, and so on. In the case of Iraq, maybe try to split up the country?
511678
Personally, I noticed that they burned a Chinese restaurant, looted their own peoples businesses, set fire to police boxes and were brought under control by their own police. As I have said so many times before people tend to forget, like with the Afghans during the Russian occupation and with "Kirun". Speaking of "Kirun", the next time that England, or France, or all of Europe needs to be saved from occupation and extermination, as in WW1 and WW2, don't call on us, call on Iraq, Iran, North Korea,Vietnam, China, or oh my, Afghanistan. I'm sure that they will rush right over to lay their lives on the line for your countries.
757206
It's one option being looked at. My own view is that the war was a mistake in the first place, but having invaded, we now have a moral responsibility to the people of Iraq to leave them a stable government with a chance at lasting peace. I hate that people are dying there, and wish it could all stop today, but it won't, no matter what we do. And if sending more troops now will give Iraq a better chance of having long term peace, I think we should do it. I don't know what the best answer is, but hopefully if we put the decision making process in the hands of people who are open to ideas rather than political hacks (a la Rumsfeld) we can come up with something.
121980
I served in the Air Force the 1st time we went to war with Iraq. That war was never officially over. For a war to be over, there must be a signed letter of surrender or a peace treaty. The only thing that we argeed to was a ceasefire. A ceasefire does not end a war, but put it on hold until there is a declaration of surrender or one of peace. I am glad that we finally have the chance to finish the war in that region. My prayers are with you and your family. You have a OOOH RAAH from Mississippi!!
767865
Because the minute we pull out, there will be a power vacuum.  The only thing keeping power in the hands of the lawful government right now and not in the grasps of the Taliban, warlords or opium dealers is the presence of Coalition troops.\n\nWe withdraw, they fill that vacuum.  What little law and order has been established will crumble.  Back to square 1.  If we give them the tough love treatment, we'll once more be dealing with an enclave that still lives by a medieval ideology and will be a breeding ground for those elements that would seek to harm our interests abroad and at home.
1033914
Well I'm all for removal of the troops but I see 2 problems with this (going by only what you have told me btw)\n\n1. We can't make deals with the insurgents. That is for the new Iraqi government to do, not us.\n\n2. The question remains: are they willing to recognize the new Iraqi government as the sole controlling power within Iraq even after we leave?
1171014
Yes this is really a no win for us. What do we hope to gain from the war we are in. A wise man once said that "War must be avoided in all circumstances". If I get best answer you will know who said that.
932473
Not only was it wrong to start a war in Iraq, it was also Illigal. \n\nOf course it will end, hopefuly not before order is restored in the country, otherwise, the US will leave another country in ruins like they did to Afganistan, Nicaragua, Cuba and others.
889180
Yes, and it's actually quite simple. Give the Iraqi government a SPECIFIC deadline to withdraw coalition troops and stick to it. They are not holding up their end of the deal. They think if they continue to appear weak and in distress that we will stay inevitably, and we seem to be falling into that trap. Our administration needs to get a clue that they are really being played by these people. How's April 1st. No Foolin'.
837009
I feel that there are very few noble causes for war. If Iraq had done some sort of action against Americans, or if they did some sort of action against one of our allies then maybe. We went over there to make rich men richer. We are an occupying force in that country. If another country invaded us to make their rich men richer I would fight until i gave out my last dying breath. I'm sure this is what the Iraqis are thinking. I am not ready to enlist for this war. "Terror" is a braod term. by deffinition there are many American terrorists in America. Its a farce and false pre-tense for war. Iraq did not bomb the world trade center. There are many countries that have prro leaders. Are we going to bomb and occupy them all? Maybe if they had lots of money to loot. A noble war is the war on hunger. enough said.
888838
no it will just become exactly the same result that happened three times before twice for the British in the 19th century and once for the Russians in the late 1970s through to 1989 when Gorbachev withdrew Russian forces.Each of these times the exact same thing happened, the longer the occupations went on directly affected the size of the insurgency and the occupiers had to leave with their tails between their legs. They all totally underestimated the afghanis ability to only unite when their lands are occupied and each times after the occupiers left they carry on fighting each other. Throughout history Afghanistan has been a very unstable country torn by tribal rivalry's which were only ever held together by the Taliban in recent history.Even in ancient history the likes of Genghis khan had the sense not to stay there after conquering it.
862381
yes i believe a small or mayb a large section the baath ( hope i've spelled that right ) sect of iraq society will martyr saddam.\nprobably not on the scale of buddha.  but enough 2 leave a power-struggle or a vacuum in an already destabilised country.\ni think the toppling of a dictator well/may make a continuing civil war in iraq 4 decades 2 come.\nthanx gw, \nhow thoughtful and sensible, NOT!\nthe lack of consideration by 1 texan village idiot & what he'll do 2 steal oil, hasn't escaped a growing band of disgruntled westerners attention & left us thinking was it really worth it.
1055735
Whe the Iraqi government takes over Iraq.  We pulled out of Somalia prematurely, and conditions got worse than they were before we went in.  We pulled out of Vietnam prematurely, and conditions got worse than they were when we went in.  There is no time limit for war.
817144
they dont really want to ....they had a half assed attempt in afganastain,and they are still there now,with the Taleban gaining control more and more.They focused all there efforts on Iraq,if they had put half the effort they put in to Iraq in to Afaganastain,they would have the bastard.