FinnMacCool
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2005
- Messages
- 2,272
- Reaction score
- 153
- Location
- South Shore of Long Island.
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Liberal
FinnMacCool said:Is victory in Iraq possible with the number of troops we have there now? personal opinions on the war aside, is it strategically impossible to have victory in Iraq without more troops?
The progress that has been made so far has been acconmplished with (about) the same number we have now - and so, victory, as defined, is possible with the current force size.
If victory is NOT possible- what argument is there that we should start pulling troops out?
More troops in theater = more non-combat casualties (more accidents)FinnMacCool said:If we had more troops in, do you think it would've reduced casualties? I think it might have.
It appears to me that we're supporting people that are working towards a western-style democracy. How are these people "no better" than the murderous thugs that would have otherwise?FinnMacCool said:In this case, we are supporting a group of people that hates another but is no better then them. I think victory is possible but not in a way which is morally just.
It appears to me that we're supporting people that are working towards a western-style democracy. How are these people "no better" than the murderous thugs that would have otherwise?
More troops in theater = more non-combat casualties (more accidents)
More troops in theater <> fewer combat casualties (more targets)
The question asked if more troops = fewer casualties.FinnMacCool said:But with all the attacks going on in Iraq, shouldn't we send more for security purposes?
We occupy Iraq like we occupy Germany. The Germans keep their own security.We are an occupation force, despite what others might say. Its not a negative term its just true. Don't we have to maintain security there?
Given that the Shi'ites and Kurds are woking together to bring a western-style democracy to Iraq, and have made numerous efforts to bring the Sunnis into the fold as well - how can you be right?FinnMacCool said:Because they have an agenda just the same as the murderous thugs you mentioned, and they are that.
This seems an absolute no-brainer. So, perhaps I've misunderstood your hypothetical situation.M14 Shooter said:If victory is NOT possible- what argument is there that we should start pulling troops out?
Simon W. Moon said:This seems an absolute no-brainer. So, perhaps I've misunderstood your hypothetical situation.
"If victory is NOT possible," what good does it do to let more good folks get killed? That seems to be a rock-solid case to "start pulling troops out."
See, I knew I missed something. I didn't add in the phrase "with the number of troops we have now."M14 Shooter said:The question was if victory is possible with the number of troops we have now.
If not, then it doesnt make sense to pull troops out, it makes sense to add troops.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?