Why do we need an Exit Stratagy for Iraq, yet we still have troops in Germany, Italy, Japan, etc.??

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 01:36 AM
link   
Well, doesn't it seem odd to you that we desparately need an exit stratagy for this war, yet insist on keeping oiur soldiers stationed in Europe?

One other thing: Can somebody out there help me find the number of American Soldiers who died in these other countries over the past two years? I'm assuming that half our overseas troops are in Iraq. That being the case, I'm wagering that the numbers are roughly equal.



[edit on 14-12-2005 by Toelint]




posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 01:56 AM
link   
I can tell you that the number of US troops in Iraq has never been more then 150,000 at a time and that the death rate for those serving in Iraq is lower then it is in the US for people of the same age group (the math was done in the WOT forum - I want to say it was by authored by Major Cee, but I can't find it at this time).

As far as exit strategy...

The problem is that people (mainly the anti-war crowd) don't seem to have any semblence of reality. No informed person in their right mind thought this would take less then a decade, but for political reasons people like to pretend it should.

The US will be in Iraq for AT LEAST a decade.

The question should be how fast can we get Iraq to be a self sustaining government. I think giving it another 5+ years at the least is logical. Those who have a bias against Bush, The US, Democracy, or what ever will say otherwise.



posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 06:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
No informed person in their right mind thought this would take less then a decade, but for political reasons people like to pretend it should.


Can you show me statements by anyone in this administration where they told the American people this would take a decade in their run up and sell of the war?

I can show you where they said the oil would pay for it and it would cost us virtually nothing and that we'd be greeted as liberators with little casualties.

I'd like to see where they were in their "right mind" and honest with the American people. Because "mission accomplished" was a long time ago.



posted on Dec, 14 2005 @ 12:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by RANT

Originally posted by American Mad Man
No informed person in their right mind thought this would take less then a decade, but for political reasons people like to pretend it should.


Can you show me statements by anyone in this administration where they told the American people this would take a decade in their run up and sell of the war?

I can show you where they said the oil would pay for it and it would cost us virtually nothing and that we'd be greeted as liberators with little casualties.

I'd like to see where they were in their "right mind" and honest with the American people. Because "mission accomplished" was a long time ago.


Rant, perhaps YOU can answer my initial question. Why...why...WHY...do we need an exit stratagy for Iraq when clearly we don't have a problem keeping troops in Germany, Italy, Iceland, France, England (well, I might let England slide. Ditto on S. Korea.) and Japan? Wasn't our "mission accomplished" in these countries sixty years ago??

SIXTY-YEARS AGO!!


Let's ask a followup question to this thread, okay? How much does it cost to keep troops in these other countries?

Dollar for Dollar, Man for Man, does it cost more to keep troops in Iraq than it costs to keep the same number of men around the world?

[edit on 14-12-2005 by Toelint]





new topics
 
0

log in

join