Tuesday, September 11, 2007
Sen. Obama (D) and Sen. Hagel (R)
Today the Senate hearings continued with Petraeus and Crocker and it heated up with some outstanding rhetoric from the left-side and right-side of the aisle, click Barack Obama and Chuck Hagel to view their assessment of the non-strategy in Iraq. What your thoughts with regard to the comments made by Obama and Hagel?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
The strategy is the most important thing in handling this war and how we precede. The benefits of going into Iraq far outnumber the downturns of not going into Iraq. A democracy has now been set up in a brutal region of the world. I would have to disagree that osama and al-queda are stronger now because we have taken the fight to them and have them on the run Osama and al-queda are now weaker than before not stronger. It was not a mistake to invade Iraq because that just removes one country for al-queda to train in.
In response to Sen. Hagel yes there has been a lot of American blood spilt, but that is what happens in war. Sad but unfortunetly true. About whether we should stay in Iraq and help the stabilization process. For example, the U.S. stayed in Japan for years after WWII and now Japan is one of the most successful economic countries. And supplies goods to most countries of the world.
I agree. As a future potential military man I rather kill them over there then having a attack over here.
Both Hagel and Obama had some very valid points, but I would like to ask if they would rather we stayed out of Iraq. Where would we be now if we hadn't invaded? Hussien would still be in power and terrorism would probably have hit us again. Right now we need to stabalize the Iraqui government enough for us to get out, but not at the cost of destroying everything we've worked for.
Obama does bring up a good point, it's not about tactic's it's about strategy. This problem is going to be very difficult to straighten out. I think that this war is going to have the worst outcome than WWII, Korea, and Vietnam because our reasons back then to go (into war) were more established and reasoned with. The reason why we went into war with iraq is still unknown of, people can only assume that we did just to get back at 9/11 or our search for nukes. The reason is still unknown today. So why go into a war when we don't have a valid reason why?
in response to sarah's comments... going into iraq had NOTHING to do w/ terrorist attacks on 9/11. the reason there haven't been more terrorist attacks is because of what the U.S. did in AFGHANISTAN not IRAQ. people seem to forget that and use it as a reason to stay in iraq, when it has never even been an issue to start with. but your other point was a good one, Hussein would still be in power and that would not be a good thing. but i think that our work in iraq is all but done and it is time to seriously consider pulling troops back, which is what senators Obama and Hagel are asking for essentially.
Post a Comment