Do want us to win the War in Iraq?

[etothepii]

Just curious about who answers this question, and how they do it. You may know the recent origins of the question (Bill O'Reilly to Rosie O'Donnel). I found that exchange very interesting. Curious to see if anyone here can not answer it.

[kevin1]

I'd be happy to just have it over at this point .

[etothepii]

ORIGINAL: kevin1

I'd be happy to just have it over at this point .

Interesting... first response ... no answer.

[Charlie P]

How do define win? We already decimated their army,caputured their dictator and they have had a Democratic election.

The Mission was accomplished a long time ago if I remember right.

[Charlie P]

You might want to decide why we started the war too before you can define"win" someone in a very high position stated we weren't going into Iraq on a nation building mission.

[vc1111]

I agree 100%.

Most on this board cannot define what winning means, so how can they answer?

Our objective there, our mission, was changing about every 2 or 3 weeks there for a while.

Most people are perfectly resigned to the idea that we're now mired in that scumhole for a long time and have given up trying to even understand the "reason du jour."

[NCOutdoors]

Most people are perfectly resigned to the idea that we're now mired in that scumhole for a long time and have given up trying to even understand the "reason du jour."

"Reason du jour?" Seems to me that we went in for one reason and now we don't want to leave until they can maintain a stable society. All other "reasons" are fluff.

I see winning as being able to get the heck out and the county not fall into complete choas and fall into another Saddam or fanatical theocracy. If we leave before then, we don't win and every single soldier that has died, has died in vain.

[Charlie P]

I see winning as being able to get the heck out and the county not fall into complete choas and fall into another Saddam or fanatical theocracy. If we leave before then, we don't win and every single soldier that has died, has died in vain

I honestly don't think we can win or we will never leave. That might be why we're building a huge base over threre.

Shiites hate the Sunni's and they bothe hate the Kurds and I don't think anything will change that.

There are death squads roaming towns and we are still there and abu garhib is back to a torture center, what happens when we leave?

[vc1111]

Yes, "reason du jour" is perfectly appropriate because after the failure to find WMD's as we were promised would be found, we were given a grocery list of reasons of why we marched upon a sovereign nation.

I see winning as being able to get the heck out and the county not fall into complete choas and fall into another Saddam or fanatical theocracy. If we leave before then, we don't win and every single soldier that has died, has died in vain.

Staying until the civil war we triggered ends an afterthought, an obligation, not a victory. We owe that to them and apparently no one thought about it even happening because at the time, at least, it seems we're absolutely powerless to control any of it. Even the members of their "army" have been accused of aiding and participating in the death squads that are torturing and murdering innoncent people.

But lets just suppose your scenario plays out, even though it may take several decades of occupation to accomplish and we may go under economically first... What did we win? What was "accomplished" aside from ousting but one of the worlds dozens of dictators?

And a larger question before you answer: Whatever we supposedly "won," was it worth bankrupting our nation?

[Charlie P]

Reason du jour?" Seems to me that we went in for one reason and now we don't want to leave until they can maintain a stable society. All other "reasons" are fluff.

So Bush saying we aren't going nation building was a what?