Question:
Do you think Bush's plan is going to work?
J.C.
2007-01-11 09:58:46 UTC
Post your comments on the new "Iraq Strategy" by George Bush.
35 answers:
michaelsan
2007-01-11 10:03:10 UTC
He telegraphed it in the speech in that chilling aside about Iran. To fully realize their plan he will start attacking Iran's support of those inside Iraq by hitting Iran enough to provoke a wider conflict. Then he can "liberate" Iran as well, going for full Dominion over Middle East oil! This has been carefully planned out from the start. They have plundered Iraq and the US Treasury for $3 billion a week, while muscling their way for Dominion, and when they take down Iran, their plan will be complete. Watch and see how they play this out.
Marcus
2007-01-18 17:13:05 UTC
No. The only way to make peace in Iraq is to make Iraq disappear. No, I do not mean drop a bomb on it. I mean that it has to become 3 separate countries. Kurds in the North, Sunnis in the Central and Shiites in the South. That won't happen because then the oil revenue won't be fairly divided to Sunnis, Kurds and Shiites.



At the very least the Kurds should get their own country. They get slapped around by Iran, Iraq and Turkey.



There is no military solution to a political problem.



The only possible solution is to supply the Iraqi government with enough weapons and equipment to do a fair job of preventing an increase in violence. This includes, jets, bombs, tanks and helicopters. And then they need to work the political crap out on their own.



We made the mistake of going in there in the first place. I'd rather pay for our mistakes with money than blood.



There is only one way to guarantee that not another American is killed in Iraq and that is to pull all US personnel out.
?
2007-01-15 20:26:10 UTC
No, unfortunately no American Counter Insurgency Plan has ever worked. Definately didn't in Vietnam and won't now. We pacified our province in SVN (Phuc Tuy) and most of the next one (Long Khan) but Westmoreland wouldn't take our advice even though Australia and the British have some of the best Co-In records around.



Our special forces in Afghanistan are greatly feared by AQ etc and our guys in Iraq are performing brilliantly. The problem (as always) is that we are very much the junior partner and the American Military has never been good at accepting advice no matter how sound. They view it criticism.
JESSIE James
2007-01-11 10:50:28 UTC
We can win this war anytime we want to. America IS the most powerful country in the world. The problem is we are too worried about world opinion, political correctness, and the American peoples' reaction to the casualties that would result (not only our soldiers but Iraqi civilians) that we will not remove the restrictions on our military that would result in a victory. Its unfortunate but war is hell and casualties are the result of war. If our leaders in Washington had worried about that in WW II, there would be no Europe as it is known today. Unless the government and the American people change their attitudes about this, then we might just as well "cut and run". This would be a tragedy. People in the Middle East would perceive us as "weak" and everyday here in the USA would be a fight for survival, just as it is in Israel today.

This is a fact. So are we going to fight to win or are we going to surrender and lose our right to live free?
murphy
2007-01-11 10:07:03 UTC
Nothing new from Bush except that "mistakes were made." The US Army's own update on counterinsurgency published December 2006, supports a formula that translates to 100,000 additional troops in Baghdad alone. It is reported that Prime Minister al Malaki has been utterly silent on Bush's plan and he replaced the military Iraqi commander for the operation with some one not approved by US commanders of the operation. These don't pass the smell test.



If the president's actions were symbolic the Senate could afford to make symbolic resolutions.



How dumb does Bush think we are? How dumb are we? How dumb we are!
medic427
2007-01-11 10:32:57 UTC
I truly wish i could say yes, but, I do not think it is enough. We could probably triple the personnel we have over there now and then start to make a difference. We are going to have to win this thing somehow or we are going to be in bad shape here. Those that advocate pulling the plug and bugging out, maybe you need to go there and see what it is like. Go see the Iraqi people, not the terrorists that are all chanting "America go home", but the wonderful citizens that are glad we are there, they are the ones that make the sacrifices we are having worthwhile. The ones wanting us out are the minority.
American citizen and taxpayer
2007-01-11 10:23:39 UTC
My concern is that we may not be sending enough troops, we may be imposing unrealistic timetables on the Iraqi government, and we may not have enough public support in the US.



If i were a terrorist, I would just "cool it" for a while until the US leaves, and then fight.



If we say "we're staying until we wipe them out," then it would be over sooner.



Yes, the "them" in question is complicated, but the logic is the same. Much of the sectarian violence has been stoked by outside actors.
anonymous
2007-01-15 16:18:17 UTC
No, America will not win the war but Bush will most likely get into war with Iran and both nations will unite against the USA.
jay
2007-01-18 23:12:26 UTC
Have we won a war unconditionally without a atomic bomb in the past 60 years ?

Who cares about a plan considering war doesn't go by plan it goes by the way of the winds and the sands.

War is unpredictable it isn't a clockwork mechanism
sjersee
2007-01-18 13:57:59 UTC
No, I don't think Bush ever planned on actually going to work.
yupchagee
2007-01-11 10:05:10 UTC
I certainly hope so. If I really knew, I would be a military analyst on cable news. It was obvious that we have to change something & losing can not be an option, the repercussions not only in the ME but worldwide would be disasterous if we quit.
uberlib
2007-01-16 09:35:52 UTC
No way. If he sent 200,000 troops instead of 20,000, maybe. 20,000 just brings troop levels to where they were in 2004. 150,000 troops just wasn't ever enough, and won't be enough this time. He screwed up, and rather than admitting it and trying something new, he's digging in and trying to make the same dumb plan work.
Perplexed
2007-01-11 10:01:56 UTC
The new strategy sounds alot like the old strategy

Here comes the draft.

Oh you know it will happen.
JudiBug
2007-01-11 10:11:24 UTC
Yes. I think it makes a lot of sense and would bring the troops home sooner if it does work.
asmith1022_2006
2007-01-11 10:10:09 UTC
Well I hope so, dont you? Or would you like to see us fail in Iraq?
pip
2007-01-11 10:03:12 UTC
I hope it does.. I'd love nothing more than for this War to end... alas.. I fear this will be another in a long line of blunders from Bush.
Silent Kninja
2007-01-11 10:05:13 UTC
No. Why should I? He's been lying and screwing up for five years and suddenly I'm supposed to believe he's finally got it? No, this is just so Halliburton can make more money providing the troops with faulty equipment.
Mr. PDQ
2007-01-19 03:48:57 UTC
4 years ago it could have worked but we will never know the answer to that one. Today it may be too little, too late.
anonymous
2007-01-16 22:19:56 UTC
According to the real agenda of the new world order, they can't fail...but according to what they want all the rest of us to believe their objectives are, I don't believe success is possible!!!!
day by day
2007-01-11 10:06:19 UTC
No, same thing is going to happen, sadly more loss of American lives & the Iraq's will still be killing each other.
anonymous
2007-01-11 10:03:01 UTC
Absolutley not. I am not sure how anyone at this point could think it is going to work. he is not trying anything new, just sending more troops into harm's way.
anonymous
2007-01-11 10:03:26 UTC
I think that it had better or we'll be seeing a Democrat in the White House and see our Country cutting and running like we did in the past. Then the attacks will start occurring on American soil all over again. Next time it will probably be Iranian Nukes.
heavnbound
2007-01-11 10:07:48 UTC
Saddam's dead isn't he? Maybe now we will stop playing around with these terrorists, send more DEDICATED MEN over there and finish this thing.
Chi Guy
2007-01-11 10:04:06 UTC
No. If a football coach made as many mistakes as Bush, how long would onre continue to listen to him? How much more important is war than football? Very.
White Shooting Star of HK
2007-01-11 10:08:19 UTC
It is the same plan over and over again.
MASTERMIKE2004
2007-01-19 03:47:13 UTC
TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE. HIS FIRST PLAN FAILED, THIS PLAN WILL FAIL MISERABLY AND THEN MAYBE IN 6 MONTHS OR SO HE'LL COME UP WITH A MUCH WORSE PLAN.
Sun Spot
2007-01-11 10:02:53 UTC
I think he's just buying time until there is a viable excuse to invade Iran...but that's just me.
da dude
2007-01-18 17:08:11 UTC
I'm not sure, but it's easy to play "arm-chair quarterback" isn't it??
Timothy M
2007-01-11 10:04:02 UTC
No. Admitting to mistakes and then telling everyone you are going to repeat those same mistakes = fool.
AD
2007-01-11 10:01:52 UTC
What plan
anonymous
2007-01-11 10:03:48 UTC
No, he had to come up with something. "Cut and run" and "Stay the course" has already been used.
taq
2007-01-19 10:00:39 UTC
If you call this a plan, NOOOOOOOOOOO
land rover
2007-01-11 10:03:39 UTC
no
Rhionnan
2007-01-16 16:04:28 UTC
NO!
anonymous
2007-01-11 10:07:48 UTC
no.


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...