Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Is it possible the Democrats are approaching the Iraq War from the wrong angle?
It's ocurred to me that maybe the Dems are taking the wrong approach. Think of it this way, many voted for the war, and yea, based on bad information. And yea, I was against the Iraq invasion and I hate war, BUT, it's obvious now that Alqueda is in Iraq, and with their current approach, the Dems are telegraphing way much information and deadlines and such to the enemy. Would it work better if they publicly called for a "swarm" instead of a surge, insisting on boosting troop levels 200%, and acting more Hawkish, and then privately, worked behind the scenes with the President and his supporters to pressure him to make changes? What do you think?
6 Answers
- 1 decade agoFavorite Answer
Certainly using the word swarm instead of surge would have no real value, and only serves to confuse the Iraq issue further. It seems to me that you are calling for a troop buildup, or an "escalation." I believe the Democrats would clearly be wrong to head in that direction. Words and political "angles" might be powerful propaganda tools, but it is my position that they are totally ineffective as military measures. You are calling for a 200% troop increase. That would bring our troop level to 450,000, or very close to the peak commitment that we made in Vietnam. That is clearly heading in the wrong direction from any angle. In the first place we don't have that many troops to send, so calling for an increase like that is not even realistic. Secondly, what would all of those troops do? Would we need to put them all in armored Humvees and send them out to patrol civilian neighborhoods? We already have 14,000 armored Humvees in Iraq. Do you propose adding 30,000 more Humvees? I don't see anything about your suggestion that Democrats adopt the word "swarm" instead of "surge" and back a 200% troop increase that stands to improve anything for the Democrats position or the situation on the ground in Iraq. Your strategy would not do any good at all.
- 1 decade ago
We need more transparency in our government, not less, Tony. Americans need to know what their representatives are up to, even if it is the timid approach we are seeing currently. And stick with your initial position on the war; if al-Qaeda is in Iraq now, it is because we brought them there by invading, just as we would have in any other country in the region we might have invaded. The one issue must be ending an occupation that continues to have a huge cost for the Iraqis and our own troops.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
What other choices do we have? As a people, we obviosly don't have much of a say so in what's happening in the white house. Are you gonna stop it from happening? NO! And neither will the remaining 80% of us against this war! Less talking, more action. Isn't that how this country was founded anyways, REVOLUTION?!?!?!?!
- James MackLv 61 decade ago
Its simple, the US has messed up in Iraq and cannot win the war. Seems like its another Vietnam and to think the UK (Blair) choose to join in this time. God help us!
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
can't be more wrong than what we have now.
