Should the US continue to bomb more countries, or scale back for awhile?
924462
And where are you hiding, Elmo? We need to step it up a bit. A lot of our bombs are getting old and stale. We need to get rid of 'em so we can make room for some fresh ones!
853166
I agree with staying until Iraq and Afghanistan have solid governments and the factions have quit butchering each other to gain power. I don't know if enough Americans can stand the length of time that may be needed to get it done.
436172
No.\n\nThe US can do it to itself.
420437
I agree with you, it is hard to imagine Americans needing more evidence than that to retaliate. I think not only should we retaliate, we should do it harder. American soldiers know what they are doing when they enlist, they are putting their lives on the line to keep things like 9/11 from happening.Remember Pearl Harbor? Japan will think twice next time. We should never allow anyone to attack our civilians. A show of force may deter the next guy on the list from doing the same.
338009
Can't see America losing the war in Iraq. Reason, we're there and now it's too late to back out. Most likely we're going to be in Iraq and the middle east for at least 20 years if not longer. The overall goal is to bring democracy to the region. Not an easy task, since most there don't know what democracy is. America will suffer a humilating defeat if it backs out now. It fought to a draw in Korea, lost in Vietnam. Now if it withdraws, that's another lose. It's not going to happen. America doesn't want to lose its international superpower status. And withdrawing from Iraq could led to that.
955566
Yes, and I think we need more help from other countries too.  I think that if we put a huge mass of boots on the ground and overwhelm the terrorists, that would be the way to go.  I think that we should systematically start from the top of Iraq and fight our way down and wipe out the terrorists.
319033
Well, we would have more of stuff going on just like 911. Just alot more and alot worse. I think that we are over there keeping them in check for the most part and showing them how to run a country that will satisfy most of their people. I dont think we should necessarily stay over there to fight but we should atleast be helping the "good" people out to better their selves and their people. Who knows, it might change in a few years or so.
407923
great idea if the US wants to set off world war 3
806967
Nuke 'em till they glow. If we don't, they will. Sadly, because of the criticism of Iraq, I think Bush has lost his ability to fight. If we do not attack now, it will cost us a major American city and millions of lives.\n\nThink I'm wrong? Look at history. There is no doubt that Japan would have used a nuke on Pearl Harbor if they had the technology available. It would have destroyed our entire fleet and given Japan free reign in the Pacific (which was their intention with the attack). Now our enemies do have nukes, and when they launch a sneak attack it will be infinitely worse than Pearl Harbor or 9/11.\n\nAll that is necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good men to do nothing.
63725
As long as the USA keeps other countries in check, and resorts to military action, then we will remain alive.  Next in line: Iran nuclear program and North Korea nuclear program.  Either disarm or...BE DISARMED!!!!
459902
Someone here mentioned 50 military actions since world war II.  For the sake of the discussion lets assume that is true.  Fifty military actions and no adding those countries to the United States.  Fifty military actions and no use of atomic weapons.  Fifty military actions and spending billions to rebuild “other” countries.  Fifty military actions and the world has an increase of democracies.  Fifty military actions and millions of people continue trying (legally and illegally) to get into the United States.  If the United States wanted a third world war, it would be raging right now with the deaths with hundreds of millions dead from atomic war with no one able to stand up to the United States.  And yet it restrains from using its massive weapons.
859588
Who the hell knows, but we do need to do something.  This war is not working out the way we expected.  We have spent 1/2 trillion and we are making enemies faster than we can kill them.
444217
Probably not, but it wouldn't hurt to try. The people who think that increasing weapons stockpiles is the right thing to do haven't cured humanity of its misery.
1143660
Too late to stop another 'super' power...they've achieved deterrence.....ie, the ability to defend itself through nuclear deterrence.  Since they are not committed to a policy of national suicide, don't look for them to initiate any preemptive strikes.  Their threat is entirely economic, soon they will be taking over the world markets...just watch.
708719
Yes. \nMaybe we should just stop arming other countries and worry about ourselves.
134443
Ask G.W. Bush. Thanks to his vendetta, it doesn't look like we're gonna get out of there anytime soon.
1128754
well the answer to your question is that american leaders are more preopcupide with the mass killings of americans such as on 9-11, thus if you have 3000 people on one time being killed it will certainly draw more attention, look at ww2 if hitler invaded the USA  dont you think that the way we live  today would be dramaticly different. thus what would you think if we had a suicide bomber  going off every 30 minets, dont you think that we would have to stop that from happening, thus this take priority over all those other issues