Comments:Bush says US troop build-up in Iraq has brought 'hope'
This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.
Quick hints for new commentators:
- Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
- Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
- You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading
The "surge" is "working" to accomplish what?
The purpose of maintaining any U.S. presence of troops in Iraq is questionable. The integrity of any claims made by the White House is questionable after they claimed and could not substantiate that Iraq harbored "weapons of mass destruction." What does it mean to say that a "surge" is "working"? Is it "working" to reduce the presence of the military in Iraq? No, quite the opposite is happening. If Al-Qaeda is seen as the ultimate perpetrator of terrorism against the United States, then what does that have to do with Iraq? Osama Bin Laden was never captured. Al-Qaeda is said to be stronger than ever. Further, maintaining any presence is depleting the U.S. treasury, our natural resources, and is a burden to tax payers.