Jude 2

I thought this would be interesting to see. The media is questioning this decision and even on The View yesterday, the liberal ladies (not Elizabeth of course) ran this idea down and took a poll of the studio audience and only one clapped (it sounded like) -- and she was booed. So what do you think?

I'm for giving our military the tools they need to finish the job, whether that's more men, more equipment, whatever.

Really though, I think that this war could be won with the troop levels already in place if the powers that be forgot about political correctness, took the handcuffs off the troops, and let them get the job done.

DaJudge wrote:Really though, I think that this war could be won with the troop levels already in place if the powers that be forgot about political correctness, took the handcuffs off the troops, and let them get the job done.

And that is why I voted no.

I voted Yes. We (And I mean Citizens of the USA) do not know all that MR. Bush does. The biggest problem that we have had is trying to fight this war Politically Correct.


The Good Ol USA has bigger problems that this war.

There were more than 3000 Killed by DRUNK DRIVERS in 2006 in California alone. I am sorry that this war has cost 3000 soldiers but sometimes you have to look at the bigger picture than the here and now. How many died on D-Day??

I voted yes. Like Billy said, I have to believe the administration is privy to information we are not and has the best thinkers helping them sort through this. I remember when we started the attack and the President said this was not going to be overnight, this was going to require patience.

Nobody wants war but if there is a cause and the security of the world is at stake, then it's hard to say we're going to sit here and do nothing. I hate the idea of our soldiers coming home injured and killed but I still believe if it wasn't for the fighting over there, there would be more fighting here.

My son is in Iraq and I dont like hearing about any more of our children being sent over there. But the way I see it is if we dont fight over there that war could very much come to US shores. No matter what if men and women join the arm forces they will in this time end up in war. I would love to see my son come home. And I know he will be when his time there is over. We need to support our troops and pray for there safty. War is not good but would you rather they fight there or over here on US land where we all are in danger? I am proud of my son for sacrifing a year of his time for USA.

Billy n NC wrote:I The biggest problem that we have had is trying to fight this war Politically Correct.

Which is why we should have just bombed them back to the stone age and NEVER sent troops in, but no we have to put a huanitarian face on war and build schools and infrastructure, and then let it devolve into sectarian struggle as we prepare to leave.

How is the end result any difference than if we'd've bombed them and let them alone?

I do not think America has the wherewithall anymore to fight a REAL war: If Hitler was to have arose today he would be visiting Camp David so a pretrentious Democrat President could grin at the Camera as "Peacemaker" and then that same Democrat woud turn around and blame Republicans for the subsequent slaughter of millions cause they didnt get on board with appeasement.

Americans are turning into a country of spoiled, self-centered cowards.

I vote NO.

And I was there in Iraq too.

There's nothing wrong with the job that the troops are already doing. The plan needs to be SMARTER.

DeWayne;
I vote yes. The reason being, if the Secretary of defense and all four of the commanders recommend this I think it would be foolish to FURTHER handicap our present deployment.
Yes I admit there needs to be smarter choices made, but according to the plan outlined our troops along with Iraqi forces are being given a green light to take and hold the Providences. Being former military I know the term green light gives the approval of "Necessary Force". In MHO that IS taking the handcuffs off and allowing them to get the job done.
One thing I think we can all agree on is the fact that a loss in Iraq would be detrimental to not only the U.S. but the World at large.

Beaver, I honestly respect your opinion, so I have to ask why you have come to the conclusion you have. I know in my limited time of service, we saw what was around us, and we heard what our leadership wanted us to hear, and it didn't always add up.

So the only why that I can look at the whole thing is to admit that I don't see the BIG PICTURE as those who sit in that capacity and simply support their decision.

I truly despise losing even ONE more life to this war, but what would be even worse would be to have lost the precious lives we have and then turn our back on their sacrifice and not do everything with in our power to bring this thing to a positive end.

Just my two cents worth...I have been known to be wrong before...many many times in fact...LOL


God bless...

I just read an interesting article in the New York Post where Democratic Senator Boxer from California questioned Condi Rice over this new surge and blasted her for being a "childless woman." It also details Hillary's flip-flopping on all of this and actually improves McCain in my imagine, who supports the surge, even though it costs him votes, and says "I'd rather lose a campaign than a war."

http://www.nypost.com/seven/01122007/po ... htm?page=0

Sometimes I just wonder that if we pull out now then all those people will have died for nothing. I want this war to be over.

wendy k

EagerBeaver wrote:I vote NO.

And I was there in Iraq too.

Why Chris?

The telling thing in this and other polls like it, is that America doesn't believe we are in a real war. It is too far removed from us and our lives. With all due respect to those of you who voted no, that in WWII ,would have been tantamount to treason.

We see the 9/11 attack as an isolated incident of terrorism by a small group of deranged individuals. It was not that! It was an act of war by Islamic radicals who have been attacking us at will over the past 20 years. The president got the largest approval rating in history when he spoke post 9/11 about going after these guys and fighting terrorism "wherever" it appeared to be harbored. Iraq is ONe such nation. Iran is the epicenter of it all. We needed to begin in Iraq so that we would be able to prosecute war in the region well beyond Iraq. We had better or it will be here.

We sit here in the best of times our country has ever known in history! By all criteria, this president has been enormously successful with the economy, unemployment, and on and on...........but he has a war to fight.

Give them twice the troops ........three times......... I will go tomorrow if they will let me. They need some fresh chaplains in country! We had better wake up in this nation and realize that we are a NATION AT WAR! That means WIN by all means necessary!!!!!

I have had the sad duty to do death notifications. It is not easy to tell a mom that her 21 year old won't be coming home alive. I am dealing with at least 3 families right now with grief counseling.

What does it take for us to understand WE ARE AT WAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LET"S WIN!!!!!!!!!!!

Give them twice the troops ........three times......... I will go tomorrow if they will let me.

I would be right behind u...

What does it take for us to understand WE ARE AT WAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LET"S WIN!!!!!!!!!!!

Sounds like a war cry to me.....!!!