Why do people who protest the war fail to see that they are in fact funding the demand for the war?

Question

each time they fill up their gasoline tank. Also do they seem to not realize that once U.S troops pull out we have the making of WW III as Iran is strategically waiting for the collapse of Iraq so they can take over the oil sights. Am I the only one who does that sees this (you can argue all you want about the war if it was justify or not and in most cases it is not, but to say that a troop pull out will benefit the nation in the long run is absurd). A troop pull out will create so much havoc in the area that we will be put in an even worse situation then we are now. Regardless how you feel we cannot deny that our economy is depend on oil and our need for it is an absolute. If we pull out this will cause a big time problem of the price of oil and therefore our economy also to pull out without Iraq being fully equipped to protect themselves is very irresponsible. We still have bases in Japan and in Germany that exist because we help build those two nations after the WW II. How is this different?

Answer 1

Okay, let's see.



1) I drive a car that still gets 35mpg and is 17 years old.

2) I can't exactly quit going to work.



A lot of people are in the same situation. We make the choices we can, but for some things there are no easy choices. I think that no matter how much havoc a troop pullout would cause, the "powers that be" in the middle east would clean things up real quick if the production/sale of oil were seriously interrupted.

Answer 2

OK, let's start with the gas tank.



By a huge percentage, most of our oil comes from Mexico and Canada. Hardly any of it comes from Iraq.



There's already havoc in the area, and every report says the longer we stay there the worse it gets. So, being there isn't a solution to preventing havoc.



You are probably correct in than the absence of US forces will eventually lead to a situation where other neighboring countries get involved. But that's going to happen whether we stay there a year, or 5 years or 50 years. How long do we want to be an occupying force? Our involvement in Iraq has already surpassed our involvement in WW2 as far as duration.



We have bases in Japan (Okinawa) and Germany, but those counties are stable without our continued assistance.



But that's a good question. How long after the end of WW2 did it take Germany to stabilize? What was our level of involvement? How much did it cost? Those are reasonable estimates to start with.....



But remember that Germany was not historically caught up in a civil war that had preceded the Nazi regime, the way Iraq's sectarian violence preceded Saddam. So, the time required for Iraq to become stable, even without any interference from other counties, is likely to be much longer than Germany.

Answer 3

WTF are you talking about? do you not see the irony or the illogic in your thought on this issue? It was Bush who has greatly destabilized the mideast and it is Bush who has created chaos in the region. He's basically destroyed Iraq and if you think that government is going to last in Iraq even if we are there for the next 30 years, you're only fooling yourself. The escalation has increased against our soldiers and against civilians by opposing factions. It's a civil war. Geeesuz, Iraq and the mid east are not the same as Japan and Germany. Both were not having ethnic or tribal conflicts. They are so culturally differnt it's beyond comparison. when are you guys going to wake up to that fact. We also get a huge amount of our oil from Africa these days. It will surpass even Saudi Arabia within the next 10 years. We get very little if any from Iraq.



Why do you compare WWII with Iraq? they are not the same wars. We had the world fighting with us during WWII and there was an actual threat with Hitler. And, Japan actually attacked us. they were the aggressive countries and spreading throughout their regions by force. Saddam was nuts, but he wasn't stupid enough to attack us or isreal with anything. He didn't even have WMD's for that matter. And, why should we have to lose as many soldiers for this war as with WWII for you to wake up to the fact that Bush is using our troops as pawns?

Answer 4

It will take decades to rebuild iraq and its ther're civil war so why should we be stickin our nose in it. how about you go and die for bush's oil money so he can buy 20 new yachts. if we would lessen our dependence on oil then we wouldnd have that problem. alternatives like biodesiel and ethanol would greatly decrease our dependece and ethonol would strengthen our farmers. i dont want to see another american die in an oil war. if iran dosent distroy iraq the different religous groups will. if we dont poke the snake then it wont bite us. we need to fix our own problems now. pulling out of iraq is the best thing to do if we can decrese our dependece on oil which wont happen in this administration because we elected an oil tycoon as president and one as vice president. its a hopless war we need out now. it would be best to wait for alternative fuel but we dont have that much time. its hopless we lost lets not let another son, daughter, brother, sister, aunt, uncle, mother, or father die over money and oil.

Answer 5

I agree with most of your points, not to say whether it was justified to go into Iraq, now that we are there it is in our best interest in the long haul to ride it out. Giving the terrorists fresh ground, to possibly overthrow the new government and take over? that would be worse than Saddam, and with someone like Osama or believes as he does, that would create more problems for the US.

Answer 6

any Iranian in invasion would surely lead to us going back in...CLEARLY... so I seriously doubt they would bother...



and if you know anything about Iran... it's army isn't that great... and the "war part" would be over relatively quickly... much like Kuwait



that's why you're the only one that sees this



and to your last point.. .the difference is we have 150,000 troops in Iraq and it's rediculously unstable.. as we cut down our number of troops vastly in Germany after WWII

Answer 7

Libs can't see past their own selfish wants...



IItrix... ROFLAO.... Did you seriously say...



It was Bush who has greatly destabilized the mideast and it is Bush who has created chaos in the region.



That is just hillarious! ahem... yes the middle east was very stable and secure until that evil Bush was elected President... then a rash of teror struck the area. People are shocked and confused? That damn Bush! Those poor people were living the sweet life until he got elected! My kid's fish died too... and I blame that on the Damn Bush!

Answer 8

I don't know why they don't see that but it certainly appears to be true.