So it seems the hot question as of late is the question "Do you want American to win the war in Iraq?". It seems CNN gets the question a lot, but others have been asked as well. It's a very simple question, to me, and for whatever reason a very ...
| |||||||
 |
| View Poll Results: Do you want the USA to win the war in Iraq? | |||
| Yes |     | 15 | 57.69% |
| No |    | 1 | 3.85% |
| It's complicated |    | 10 | 38.46% |
| Voters: 26. You may not vote on this poll | |||
| Register to Post a Reply |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools |
10-28-2006, 04:41 PM
| #1 | ||||||||||
| Banned  Conservative Government is another way to say Better Than You 
| Do you want America to win the war in Iraq? So it seems the hot question as of late is the question "Do you want American to win the war in Iraq?". It seems CNN gets the question a lot, but others have been asked as well. It's a very simple question, to me, and for whatever reason a very hard question to others. Here are some examples:
At any rate, the answer I give is yes, I want America to win in Iraq. I don't care how the victory is achieved, or what it means to 'win'. The goal is pretty simple; we need to win. The implications of a perceived loss in Iraq is much more detrimental to the future of our country than is a global perception of a win. It seems those who find it difficult to answer this question try to define what it means to 'win', or they have a specific end goal in sight_such as Letterman's idea that we have no US deaths and a stabilized country in Iraq_and if that equates to a 'win' for the US, then yes. I think he's approaching it backwards if you ask me. We should all root for a win, even if that's a little different than the way we had envisioned it. So I ask you all here; do you want the US to win the war in Iraq? | ||||||||||
     | |||||||||||
|
10-28-2006, 04:44 PM
| #2 | ||||
| Common Sense Conservative  Realist
| What would a "win" look like? | ||||
| |
|
10-28-2006, 04:45 PM
| #3 | ||||
| Banned Conservative Government is another way to say Better Than You
| Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo I think that's my point; a win is a win, I really don't know the specific details, but it's likely got to do with a stable nation of some sort, and most of our troops coming home. 
| ||||
| |
|
10-28-2006, 04:46 PM
| #4 | ||||
| Common Sense Conservative Realist
| Originally Posted by ballz2wallz How in the hell can you say we need to do something when you don't know what that thing means?
| ||||
| |
|
10-28-2006, 04:47 PM
| #5 | ||||
| Banned Conservative Government is another way to say Better Than You
| Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo
 We need to win, whatever way possible. Personally, I think a win will entail a stable government in which they are in control of their own security measures, nationally and internationally, with a likely minimal US presence stationed in several bases over there. | ||||
| |
|
10-28-2006, 04:49 PM
| #6 | ||||
| Common Sense Conservative Realist
| Originally Posted by ballz2wallz Who doesn't want Iraq to become stable and our troops to come home? That's a given. The complexity of it is whether or not we should keep spending lives and money chasing that 'win' when it may not be possible, or if what it would take to win might come with negative consequences that outweigh the victory.
| ||||
| |
|
10-28-2006, 04:50 PM
| #7 | ||||
| Banned Conservative Government is another way to say Better Than You
| Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo Do you want them to win or not?
| ||||
| |
|
10-28-2006, 04:52 PM
| #8 | ||||
| Common Sense Conservative Realist
| Originally Posted by ballz2wallz YES, I want us to win, but posing that question is meaningless because it practically gets you no where because of the concerns I just raised.
| ||||
| |
|
10-28-2006, 04:54 PM
| #9 | ||||
| Banned Conservative Government is another way to say Better Than You
| Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo No, you answered the question. You want us to win. I would hope everyone wants us to win. How we do that might be a bit more difficult, but the question is simple. Why people in the videos find it so hard to answer that boggles my mind.
Feel free to vote on the 'yes' answer. | ||||
| |
|
10-28-2006, 05:04 PM
| #10 | ||||
| ipsa Scientia Potestas est  Pragmatist North Carolina
| I voted it's complicated. It begs the question "What determines what winning is?" Letterman is exactly correct. However, the real question is ... at this point, is the cost of winning worth it for what we'll get? What do we expect to get out of Iraq? A stable pro-US democracy looks frankly impossible because the majority of Iraqi's resent our presence and want us out. They say attacks against our troops are completely justifiable and have no problems with them. So, it's a matter of "best case scenario" at this point, IMO.. and because the Bush Administration has failed to adopt an acceptable alternate strategy in the wake of their current "stay the course" failing so dramatically.. the "best case scenario" is looking increasingly unappealing for the cost. | ||||
| |
|
10-28-2006, 05:07 PM
| #11 | ||||
| Banned Conservative Government is another way to say Better Than You
| Originally Posted by motivez No, that is a separate question entirely. What would it matter what the definition of winning is? You want us to win, don't you? If winning means splitting up Iraq into a stable government where everyone is happy, then so be it. If winning means Iraq is stable as it is, and they are in control of their country without our military forces, so be it. If winning means they need our presense, but little action, then so be it.
Don't confuse 'do you want us to win' with 'how do we win'. They are separate entities, and the question I'm asking is not complicated. As you know, it's a lot easier to achieve victory, however we can, if it's a shared desire. Unfortunately, it's becoming obvious that too many people don't really want us to win. This question let's us see who those people are. | ||||
| |
|
10-28-2006, 05:08 PM
| #12 | ||||
| Common Sense Conservative Realist
| Originally Posted by ballz2wallz Wolf said "yes" in a very straight forward way.
| ||||
| |
|
10-28-2006, 05:10 PM
| #13 | ||||
| Banned Conservative Government is another way to say Better Than You
| Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo Yes, this time he did. I guess the point was, he didn't want to answer it earlier.
| ||||
| |
|
10-28-2006, 05:13 PM
| #14 | ||||
| Common Sense Conservative Realist
| Originally Posted by ballz2wallz No they're not. They're one in the same. Outside the simplistic world of bumper sticker rhetoric, questions of what you want are complicated by the how.
If I said to most people, do you want to be rich, most people would say yes, but that's because they're just talking. Practically speaking, when people confront that question, it becomes very complicated because it becomes a question of "at what cost?" What if getting rich means having to do ethically or morally questionable things? What if you have to risk everything you have? What if it means doing illegal things? Then all of a sudden the "simple" question of whether you want to get rich becomes complicated in reality. In the same way, the "do you want America to win" question becomes complicated when you consider the harsh realities of "at what cost?" What if it meant 100,000 US soldiers dying to win in Iraq, would you still support winning? Or would you think the benefit is no longer worth the cost? | ||||
| |
|
10-28-2006, 05:15 PM
| #15 | ||||
| I DIDNT KNOW THAT  Corpus Christi, Texas
| It is complicated.... I dont see this as an easy yes or no answer. I always want to win, but whether I put myself in a position to win or lose is contigient on the prize at stake and what I have to do in order to win that prize. If I am going to create a battle for whatever reason I would damn sure include, in its creation, a win. Last edited by KatKanPlay; 10-29-2006 at 08:15 AM. | ||||
| |
|
10-28-2006, 05:18 PM
| #16 | ||||
| Banned Conservative Government is another way to say Better Than You
| Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo So you think that if the cost was 'too high' right now, you would support not winning?
I find that to be the most dangerous thought of all, that there are people saying such things. I think we should win, at any cost, becuase the long term affects of NOT winning are far more detrimental than the cost in the short run. Imagine what would happen if we didn't lose because we were worried about a couple hundred or thousand more US soldiers dying, or it costing a few more billion dollars. The thought scares me. I want the US to win, at any cost. | ||||
| |
|
10-28-2006, 05:20 PM
| #17 | ||||
| Banned Conservative Government is another way to say Better Than You
| Originally Posted by KatKanPlay Again, I think you're thinking is too near-sighted. Think of the long-run...the world-wide political spectrum.
If we lose in Iraq, because it is 'costing too many American lives', we are in deep trouble, because every terrorist organization in the world now views us as an easy target. I don't ever downplay the lives of our soldiers, but there is no way in hell anybody can ever say we've lost too many American lives in this war, when they are in reality so few that we've lost. | ||||
| |
|
10-28-2006, 05:20 PM
| #18 | ||||
| Common Sense Conservative Realist
| Originally Posted by ballz2wallz Of course. What? You're advocating making military decisions without considering cost/benefit? That's insane.
| ||||
| |
|
10-28-2006, 05:23 PM
| #19 | ||||
| Common Sense Conservative Realist
| Originally Posted by ballz2wallz Wow, you're pretty blasé about sacrificing other people's lives when it's not your own ass on the line.
| ||||
| |
|
10-28-2006, 05:23 PM
| #20 | ||||
| ipsa Scientia Potestas est Pragmatist North Carolina
|
|
