Will Americans outlast the insurgency?

[Gunny]

In late 2003, a majority of Americans(roughly 56%) supported the war. Now the majority are against. Yes, the numbers are going down slowly. I realize this. But if winning the war is going to take 7 or 8 more years, how much lower can the number go before the majority DEMANDS withdrawl from it leaders.

As for the polls, there are quite a few of them done by mulitple groups over a long period of time that all point to the same conclusion. They are trustworthy.

Yes, the situation is getting better in the short-term, but we haven't even gotten to what happens when Iraq's ethnicities clash. That is where the real trouble will occur.[/QUOTE]

 

[sitarro]

Yes, the situation is getting better in the short-term, but we haven't even gotten to what happens when Iraq's ethnicities clash. That is where the real trouble will occur.

Wow, such an incredibly positive attitude.
I've noticed that leftist are like that except when it comes to wholesome things such as gay sex, giving felons the right to vote, and of course the biggy. . . killing innocent baby humans by the millions. You guys are just the definition of progressive!

My money is on the people of Iraq who after living under the iron fist of a maniacal asshole most of their lives have raised a purple finger at the ones in their country trying to prevent them their right to freedom and flocked to the voting booths in numbers the people of our country never see. In doing so they have flipped off the terrorist and the jerks of the idiot left from the rest of the world and taken the first steps to a greater Iraq.

I am proud of them and the people that have risked everything to bring them to this point. I say we do whatever is needed to help them be safer than they have been in the past. It is a noble cause and the correct thing to do. . . the American thing to do!

 

[Palestinian Jew]

Wow, such an incredibly positive attitude.

Realism, my friend. So far, all of my predictions I made in early 2002 have been right on.

It wont take that long.

What are you basing that on. Mine is on General Casey's opinion that it will take 10 years to defeat the insurgency, with an average of 9 years to defeat an insurgency anyway.

Plus, once the Kurds, Shi'a, and Sunnis begin a civil war, we'll have that to resolve.

If history is any indication, a stable democracy(Bush's goal) will not be obtainable within 10 years.

You dont think they are already clashing????

Not yet. See, isn't that at least one optimistic view from me. All of the ethnic groups aren't fighting...yet. Look for a civil war within 10 years, something like Kurd vs. Shi'a vs. Sunni, with Turkey thrown in on the Shi'a/Sunni side, Iran on the Shi'a side, and Jordan/Syria probably being thrown in with the Sunni population.

 

[theHawk]

This is the most absurd arguement I've heard yet. That we should pull out because of a fucking poll. Well you know what, I don't believe the war was worth it either. That doesn't mean I think we should pull out, nor that we are wrong in what we are doing. You see, my response is the same as an anti-war lib, but for totally different reasons. I don't think we should of put our soldiers in harms way, I think we should of just carpet bombed that country pillar to post.

 

[LuvRPgrl]

Realism, my friend. So far, all of my predictions I made in early 2002 have been right on. .

realism,,,last refuge of a weak arguement.

SO post those predictions here, all of em..lets us decide

What are you basing that on. Mine is on General Casey's opinion that it will take 10 years to defeat the insurgency, with an average of 9 years to defeat an insurgency anyway..

Gen Casey has been wrong on alot of things in this war. If an average is 9 years, then that means some only take 5-6

Plus, once the Kurds, Shi'a, and Sunnis begin a civil war, we'll have that to resolve. .....

I dont think that will happen, there are lots of reasons to believe that, for one, the SUNNI, now that they see the process is going forward are not getting involved instead of trying to stop it. The bus is pulling out, they want on.....

If history is any indication, a stable democracy(Bush's goal) will not be obtainable within 10 years. .

WHy do you restrict it to a stable democracy? If in four or five years our troop level is down to around 10-15,000 maybe the American publics opinion of them being there will be different, especially if and when the casualty count drops dramatically. I noticed in those polls they didnt ask "If in four years, only 10,000 troops would be needed to ensure the peace, would you be ok with that?"

Not yet. See, isn't that at least one optimistic view from me. All of the ethnic groups aren't fighting...yet. Look for a civil war within 10 years, something like Kurd vs. Shi'a vs. Sunni, with Turkey thrown in on the Shi'a/Sunni side, Iran on the Shi'a side, and Jordan/Syria probably being thrown in with the Sunni population.

Your mind is made up. You are basing your opinion on things that havent happened, you are predicting worse case scenario, THAT my friend, is pessimism. Good thing you werent around to advise General G. Washington...

 

[deaddude]

Your mind is made up.

As, it would seem, is yours

You are basing your opinion on things that havent happened

It is called a prediction dear.

You are predicting worse case scenario, THAT my friend, is pessimism.

One prepares for the worst in order to be ready for it.

Good thing you werent around to advise General G. Washington...

And if Washington was advised by a blithering optimist where would he have ended up?

 

[Bonnie]

I think we are getting to the point where US troop levels will begin to decrease, since the Iraqis have now approved their Constitution. However, Bush won't announce any timetables because that gives the terrorist insurgency the initiative in their fight. I think that troop levels will decrease significantly over the next two or three years as the situtation in Iraq becomes better, and the Iraqis can defend their own land.

And in another month or so the Iraqis will have chosen their four year parliament, which is quite amazing given the circumstances.

 

[Bonnie]

This is the most absurd arguement I've heard yet. That we should pull out because of a fucking poll. Well you know what, I don't believe the war was worth it either. That doesn't mean I think we should pull out, nor that we are wrong in what we are doing. You see, my response is the same as an anti-war lib, but for totally different reasons. I don't think we should of put our soldiers in harms way, I think we should of just carpet bombed that country pillar to post.

What's absurd is when Bush senior didn't go all the way to Baghdad during the Gulf war, he was, and is lambasted to this day by the left saying he left the iraqis to die and how can they ever trust the U.S again...

 

[theHawk]

Yup and he did that at the advice of our wonderful allies in Europe....

 

[Palestinian Jew]

Yup and he did that at the advice of our wonderful allies in Europe....

And don't forget left coast liberal ivory tower elitists, such as Dick Cheney in 1991 saying "No, we should not have gone to Baghdad" and his lefty reference to Vietnam "We did it right to avoid a quagmire". What will these libs think of next?

 

[Gunny]

What's absurd is when Bush senior didn't go all the way to Baghdad during the Gulf war, he was, and is lambasted to this day by the left saying he left the iraqis to die and how can they ever trust the U.S again...

Come now Bonnie ....tsk tsk .... you're usually more knowledgeable than this.

In order to obtain a US air base in Saudi Arabia and position troops in Saudi Arabia, and use Turkish, Saudi, and Syrian airspace, Bush was forced to agree to not pursue Saddam nor his army beyond the Kuwait-Iraq border, and agreement we bent the Hell out of the rules on.

Had Bush reneged on his agreement, we would not only be distrusted in every household in the ME as we already were, but diplomatically as well.

It was also thought at the time by the major players in our government that leaving Saddam in place with his teeth pulled was preferrable to the civil war amongst Iraq's factions in a grab for power that would occur once he was removed. I DO recall one higher up making the statement "there is no Abraham Lincoln waiting in the wings to take his place."

At no time during Desert Shield/Desert Storm was our objective to do anything more than remove Saddam's army from Kuwait, nor were we supposed to go even as far into Iraq as we did.

 

[Bonnie]

Come now Bonnie ....tsk tsk .... you're usually more knowledgeable than this.

In order to obtain a US air base in Saudi Arabia and position troops in Saudi Arabia, and use Turkish, Saudi, and Syrian airspace, Bush was forced to agree to not pursue Saddam nor his army beyond the Kuwait-Iraq border, and agreement we bent the Hell out of the rules on.

Had Bush reneged on his agreement, we would not only be distrusted in every household in the ME as we already were, but diplomatically as well.

It was also thought at the time by the major players in our government that leaving Saddam in place with his teeth pulled was preferrable to the civil war amongst Iraq's factions in a grab for power that would occur once he was removed. I DO recall one higher up making the statement "there is no Abraham Lincoln waiting in the wings to take his place."

At no time during Desert Shield/Desert Storm was our objective to do anything more than remove Saddam's army from Kuwait, nor were we supposed to go even as far into Iraq as we did.

LOL preaching to the chior here M

 

[Gunny]

LOL preaching to the chior here M

***You're supposed to post the secret signal when being disengenuous***

 

[Bonnie]

***You're supposed to post the secret signal when being disengenuous***

Oh right.. remind what that is again....... :

 

[Gunny]

Oh right.. remind what that is again....... :

The rolling eyes thingie would've worked. The whole "Bush didn't finish the job" issue just gets my blood up a little.

 

[Bonnie]

The rolling eyes thingie would've worked. The whole "Bush didn't finish the job" issue just gets my blood up a little.

I get that, but you did see the point I was making right??

 

[Gunny]

I get that, but you did see the point I was making right??

Ummmm...... can't say I do unless it's the fact liberals are liars.

 

[Bonnie]

Ummmm...... can't say I do unless it's the fact liberals are liars.

hypocrites

please don't make me smack you

 

[deaddude]

There will be no smacking here, unless of course..... :spank3:



:halo: