20,000 More Troops In Iraq

[cu in 4years Dan 1]

so what do you think about it?whats your views.Usually i wouldn't want it to happen, but America is in it very far now, and i think it was said in Bush's speach, to pull out now would just cause to much havoc and deaths all around the nation (Iraq)

[digitalmonkey 929]

I hope they all get iPods to bring with them.

[dna4ever 2]

WHAT THE CRAP? I THOUGHT WE WON THIS CRAP ALONG TIME AGO?

[digitalmonkey 929]

WHAT THE CRAP? I THOUGHT WE WON THIS CRAP ALONG TIME AGO?

They have more suspicions of weapons of mass destruction.

[beans-n-icewater 18]

Lets go.... Im readyZach has backup...

[dna4ever 2]

Lets go.... Im ready

fyp

[Dirtydutch 8]

Lets go.... Im ready

You're gonna' need it, they're strapping up early over there:

[jcplas5555 0]

Its all part of Bush's Strategery.......I will just love hearing the excuses next time when this plan does as well as all the others.

[showstopper24 0]

I think its good with more troops-hopefully it will end sooner. and hopefully if this works out, the US will send troops, or convince other countries of the UN to send troops and stop the genocide in Darfur

[The Czar 0]

It's similar to bluffing at a pot, getting called, bluffing again, getting called and then, just when you know you're beat, tossing in another 20,000 chips.

[princeof56k 0]

so what do you think about it?whats your views.Usually i wouldn't want it to happen, but America is in it very far now, and i think it was said in Bush's speach, to pull out now would just cause to much havoc and deaths all around the nation (Iraq)

I think its a bad idea. First, I dont think more troops will help since its the same people running the war. They might say they have a new plan, but we've heard this before.Second, even if more troops were the answer, the amount he's asking for wont cut it. He's probably needs to add another zero to that number. His asking price would increase the number of troops to 153,500. The highest amount we've had there was 160,000 last year, and we still couldnt get it done with that many troops. To do what he wants, we would basically need to have enough troops there to conquer the country by force. I dont see any way that happens.Its unfortunate and sad, but I think we have to cut our losses here.

[princeof56k 0]

I think its good with more troops-hopefully it will end sooner. and hopefully if this works out, the US will send troops, or convince other countries of the UN to send troops and stop the genocide in Darfur

I think it will be a while before the US sends troops anywhere. I dont think the American public could take it. You can thank Bush for that. And its a real shame because the people in Darfur really need help.

[SuperJon 175]

It's similar to bluffing at a pot, getting called, bluffing again, getting called and then, just when you know you're beat, tossing in another 20,000 chips.

Ummm...no.When you bluff at a pot in poker, you're only risking the money or chips you have in front of you. Bush is risking the lives of actual people. Yes, this is what they signed up for. But to be thrown into a no win situation is just absurd.If GW can win this war before the elections in 2008, I will let D ick Cheney teabag my mom on national television. It's just not going to happen.Please note: I am in no way, shape, or form able to hold a political debate with anyone on this forum. I am simply throwing in my 2 1/2 cents.

[pckt10s 0]

can anyone say... DRAFT?

[Dirtydutch 8]

Ummm...no.When you bluff at a pot in poker, you're only risking the money or chips you have in front of you. Bush is risking the lives of actual people. Yes, this is what they signed up for. But to be thrown into a no win situation is just absurd.If GW can win this war before the elections in 2008, I will let D ick Cheney teabag my mom on national television. It's just not going to happen.Please note: I am in no way, shape, or form able to hold a political debate with anyone on this forum. I am simply throwing in my 2 1/2 cents.

Win? There's no objective. All the do is patrol on small raids, looking for small, easily-replaced weapons caches, allthewhile being bullet fodder.

[Dirtydutch 8]

can anyone say... DRAFT?

I simply won't go. I'd be shot before I'd give in to that. A draft is worse than slavery. I repeat: worse than slavery

[AKoffsuit 0]

WHAT THE CRAP? I THOUGHT WE WON THIS CRAP ALONG TIME AGO?

[pockets 0]

So we need more troops? I can see only one way to settle this.Not it.

[cu in 4years Dan 1]

I think its a bad idea. First, I dont think more troops will help since its the same people running the war. They might say they have a new plan, but we've heard this before.Second, even if more troops were the answer, the amount he's asking for wont cut it. He's probably needs to add another zero to that number. His asking price would increase the number of troops to 153,500. The highest amount we've had there was 160,000 last year, and we still couldnt get it done with that many troops. To do what he wants, we would basically need to have enough troops there to conquer the country by force. I dont see any way that happens.Its unfortunate and sad, but I think we have to cut our losses here.

i think you make a good point, but i think 20,000 more troops can make a difference.its not the same as having 5 vs 10 in a fight then adding 2 more to make 7. in that case the numbers are small and it wouldnt make a difference, but in this case 20,000 is a lot, and the men can stretch a very very long way. having a the amount of troops at the moment may not cut it, but that 20K extra just may cut it.again we don't know the exact details so we cant make completely accurate assumptions.but i don't think that it is feasible to cut our losses now, i mean the troops are in far to deep now. its the same as stabbing someone. if you stab someone, not good, but to pull the knife out before you get medical attention would make the situation much worse.superjon nicely said.

[digitalmonkey 929]

I simply won't go. I'd be shot before I'd give in to that. A draft is worse than slavery. I repeat: worse than slavery

You can come to Canada.Here, get to work...favourcolourtheatrecentre

[KONGOS 0]

but i don't think that it is feasible to cut our losses now, i mean the troops are in far to deep now. its the same as stabbing someone. if you stab someone, not good, but to pull the knife out before you get medical attention would make the situation much worse.superjon nicely said.

We're not pulling the knife out....we're stabbing the person again.

[DonkSlayer 1]

Wars and conflicts are results-oriented. If Iraq is relatively stable within a year, the Iraqis have reasonable control over all their provinces by Nov., we'll probably be pulling out by Dec., with forces still in Anbar and some in Baghdad. You'll say "Yeah maybe it worked, but I still hate Bush. He pays the insurgents to blow people up." We'll know it's time to go when the Iraqi gov. says "no really, we've got it now, thanks."If that stuff doesn't happen on time, Bush mentioned the presscore that there's a "plan B" but declined to elaborate at this time.

[hblask 1]

It's similar to bluffing at a pot, getting called, bluffing again, getting called and then, just when you know you're beat, tossing in another 20,000 chips.

.... after your opponent is all-in.

[showstopper24 0]

I think it will be a while before the US sends troops anywhere. I dont think the American public could take it. You can thank Bush for that. And its a real shame because the people in Darfur really need help.

i agree, hopefully dan ki-moon (or whatever the new secretary general of the UN) can stop whats happening in Darfur

[fleung22 1]

don't forget...Assad is not to blame!oh no, i've already said too much.