Support the Troops by Ending the War

I am praying hard for our Soldiers and Marines there In Iraq right now because they have it harder than I did while I was there. I returned last November.

While I was there, we often saw the debate and anger toward our commander in chief on TV. Debate is not a bad thing, but some things that were said and done were hard to see as SUPPORT for the troops.

Today is so much worse... Now congress is wanting to pass a resolution against the President's plan to send more troops. Some of those pushing this resolution, not so long ago, were saying we needed MORE troops in Iraq. AMAZING, HUH ?

It would seem that once the President decided to send in more troops... it became a BAD IDEA. That sounds like politics not patriotism.

I just hope people can ask themselves... If we pull out, what then? Will these terrorists have more respect for the USA if we turn and pull out? Will we be at greater risk or a lesser risk of attacks by leaving?

One thing I asked myself during this last election was this... Who would Al Queda vote for? Who would they most want in office? These are people who cut peoples heads off, blow up women and children and Hate America... Who do you think they would vote for?
Would they support this resolution by our congress to oppose the President sending more troops? Makes you wonder, huh?

 

President Bush was the wrong person to lead this war. Many retired military commanders have stated that Bush had failed at putting togethor a stratagy for taking on Iraq. I think that many Americans are disappointed that the President did not follow through pursuing Osama Bin Laden nor does he see the importance of building upon the successes of Afghanastan but chose to divert money that was to go to Afghanastan to Iraq. As far as adding more troops in Iraq , that was a blunder that the President committed early on at the beginning of the invasion of Iraq , now it is simply too little and too late. Our troops have accomplished many victories in Iraq, now it is time to put the responsibilty of stabalizing the country where it should lie with the Iraqi government and it's people.Their has been no loss of confidence our troops in the field but their has been tremendous loss of confidence in the leadership of the President and it would be wrong to continue to support our Presidents failed war policies in Iraq which has only led to corruption and war profiteering. The line in the sand has been drawn, Americans and Veterans from that war have said enough is enough it is time to put an end to Bush's madness.

 

You should say some veterans have said 'enough'. In fact, you were responding to an Iraq war vet (redbelt) who sees things completely differently than you do. Army and Marine units in Iraq have consistantly exceeded their reenlistment goals, and that tells me they are in this thing to win.

 

The war is won. What more are you wanting out of this deal. The country of Iraq belong to the Iraqi people, it is not the property of the United States of America.
It is time to let them run their own country. The vets who are voiceing their opinions against this war have proven their bravery on the field and are taking a gigantic step to stand against the continued bloodshed of our American treasure and that takes bravery too.
BTW, I undrestand that redbelt was giving his opinion and I understand that there are vets out there that have been in this conflict and are against the war in Iraq and I give credence to their opinions as well.

 

The Iraqi army and government are not able to stand on their own yet. Everybody knows this, including President Maliki, who had been hinting that he might resign due to exhaustion with the situation. The planned additional troops in Bahgdad have given him, and other Iraqis hope for a resolution to the violence in the capitol. He now says that he is committed to clearing it of al Qaeda, former Baathist terrorists, militias and death squads.

"The plan that President Bush has announced is based on our plan," said Ali al-Dabbagh, al-Maliki's spokesman. "We presented it to him during the summit in Amman last month, and he promised to study it. The result is a joint Iraqi-American plan to defeat the terrorists."

Well yes, I had heard that it does belong to the Iraqis. Good point.

 

As someone who has 2 sons who have 3 tours of Iraq between them, I can assure you they didn't re-enlist because they are "...in this thing to win". They re-enlisted for the same the reason that most of their buddies talk about re-enlisting...if you have children, there's nowhere else that will give you benefits for having children like the military does (housing, utilities, extra monies, etc).

 

The unfortunate thing is, such economic realities have made this a "rich man's war, and a poor man's fight", as was said about the Civil War in which one could buy off the draft by paying an alternate to go in one's place.

 

This is a simple equation. I'm surprised so many are having trouble with it. All the reasons you give for asserting that WWII was a war of survival apply to today.

Using your logic, I want to know why you are not advocating we attack N.Korea and Iran no later than tomorrow.

 

Our most dangerous adversaries won't fire a missile. They'll smuggle nuclear bombs into the country and set them off all over the place. We'll flounder around trying to figure out who to obliterate and end up doing nothing.

The funny thing is that we already know where they will get the weopons and we just wait and do nothing.

 

Still peddling Vietnam era Myths.:tonofbricks:

 

Perfect example. Treaties are made for honest participants. If you believe anything the Iranians say about their nuclear program, you are a gullible fool. To some, treaties just provide cover for illigitimate pursuits.

Neither had Germany or Japan tested or developed a delivery system for nuclear weapons prior to WWII, but it was OK to go to war for our "survival" against them.

Try being consistent, Ken.

 

So seems like our only choice would be to either annihilate our live with the threat.

 

I think President Maliki would rather have the options of getting out and letting someone else deal with the problem. Our troop presence will only complicate and detain what ever hopes there could be for stabalization of that country. Most likely the end result will be to rely on assistance from other middle eastern countries.

 

You are dodging the issue.

The real issue here is that if you consider WWII a battle for survival, you have to consider circumstances today at least as dire as they were in 1941.

When do we go on the offensive against those we know, beyond a shadow of doubt, wish to destroy us today?

 

The job is not even half done. Iran and N. Korea still remain.