Military - October 2006

how did they draft doctors?
did they specifically get a list of doctors?
or
when they randomly picked people, if they happened to be doctors, they sent them to medical units?

2006-10-01 14:10:44 · 7 answers · asked by Quiz Master 1

i am 14 years old which is young BUT i know that to get to the place i want i have to start now I always wanted to be a NY fighter pilot wich i think is a great job but looking at all those pilots in the videos they all looks skinny no muscle no sunten and i am not like that i like sport anyway the whole point is i like jets allot but i dont think its the right job for me sitting in a jet for 10 hours a day or w/e BUTTTTT there is the Coast Guard i just saw a movie guardian and it inspierd me allot i know that its not true and its allot different but i would really like to save lifes too but not too many people respect them exept the ones that been saved and families because they just count they like as embulance guys i mean i can bet if i will ask in my school 90 % will respect military more then those guys which is not right because coast guard does probably a harder job untill the war starts uhh i dont know yea one more thing PLEASE GIVE ME ALL WEBS AND..

2006-10-01 14:07:20 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous

CNN news showed him walking along a road in Iraq with the other Marines. He was mumbling something about the war being based on lies. Said the insurgents are strong and he's not prepared to take on people who are protecting their way of life. He ( Marine ) wants to go home.

2006-10-01 14:06:17 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

I like to see things from the opponent's perspective. I'm excited to see what people say when they try to look at this from the other side. My thought is non-violence in the footsteps of Ghandi and Martin Luther King Jr. What is yours?

2006-10-01 13:50:20 · 10 answers · asked by JonFugeEverybody! 2

Mk..Lets say you signed for 5 years and were getting "$12,000" as an enlistment bonus..

-How much of this is taxed?
-How will this be payed to me

(Active Duty Army BTW)(US)

2006-10-01 13:47:00 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous

Here in Michigan we have had a church group carry signs and laugh at the dead soldiers. Many who carry signs are republicans and supported the war. Is this the Republican way?

2006-10-01 13:43:16 · 35 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-10-01 13:35:12 · 12 answers · asked by Stephanie D 3

I know someone that got a DUI last night (his 3rd) and I am sure he will be in jail for a bit since no one will bail him out. He is in the ARMY and was about to leave to go overseas next month. Anyone know if the ARMY will take any action on this matter or do they not get involved?

USA ARMY

2006-10-01 13:15:48 · 11 answers · asked by sooners83 4

I know the army stretch at the moment but sending parttimer's with only a few months combat training into a grazey war zone like Afghanistan must be complete madness.

2006-10-01 13:05:44 · 17 answers · asked by Redbull 1

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061001/ap_on_re_us/canada_war_deserters

This was big news when it first happened.

My personal belief is this guy signed up for the army and should serve his country, he is a coward for going AWOL. He should get life in the stockcade.

2006-10-01 12:41:14 · 14 answers · asked by E C 2

2006-10-01 12:36:59 · 8 answers · asked by julean33 2

Unable to contact recruiter due to weekend.

2006-10-01 12:30:35 · 3 answers · asked by Dutchcracksoldier 1

I need to know some alternatives to war for my government class, any help would be appreciated!

2006-10-01 12:29:44 · 13 answers · asked by Heather 3

2006-10-01 12:26:07 · 22 answers · asked by Stephanie D 3

It is my understanding that the United States of America has an unstoppable military force. It is widely accepted by military experts around the world that the U.S could literqally defeat the entire world at war with one hand tied behind its back.
Stealth drones, G.P.S.-guided smart munitions that hit precisely where aimed; antitank bombs that guide themselves; space-relayed data links that allow individual squad leaders to know exactly where American and opposition forces are during battle — the United States military rolled out all this advanced technology, and more, in its lightning conquest of Iraq. No other military is even close to the United States. The American military is now the strongest the world has ever known, both in absolute terms and relative to other nations; stronger than the Wehrmacht in 1940, stronger than the legions at the height of Roman power. For years to come, no other nation is likely even to try to rival American might.


Which means: the global arms race is over, with the United States the undisputed heavyweight champion. Other nations are not even trying to match American armed force, because they are so far behind they have no chance of catching up. The great-powers arms race, in progress for centuries, has ended with the rest of the world conceding triumph to the United States.

Now only a nuclear state, like, perhaps, North Korea, has any military leverage against the winner.

Paradoxically, the runaway American victory in the conventional arms race might inspire a new round of proliferation of atomic weapons. With no hope of matching the United States plane for plane, more countries may seek atomic weapons to gain deterrence.

North Korea might have been moved last week to declare that it has an atomic bomb by the knowledge that it has no hope of resisting American conventional power. If it becomes generally believed that possession of even a few nuclear munitions is enough to render North Korea immune from American military force, other nations — Iran is an obvious next candidate — may place renewed emphasis on building them.

For the extent of American military superiority has become almost impossible to overstate. The United States sent five of its nine supercarrier battle groups to the region for the Iraq assault. A tenth Nimitz-class supercarrier is under construction. No other nation possesses so much as one supercarrier, let alone nine battle groups ringed by cruisers and guarded by nuclear submarines.

Russia has one modern aircraft carrier, the Admiral Kuznetsov, but it has about half the tonnage of an American supercarrier, and has such a poor record that it rarely leaves port. The former Soviet navy did preliminary work on a supercarrier, but abandoned the project in 1992. Britain and France have a few small aircraft carriers. China decided against building one last year.

Any attempt to build a fleet that threatens the Pentagon's would be pointless, after all, because if another nation fielded a threatening vessel, American attack submarines would simply sink it in the first five minutes of any conflict. (The new Seawolf-class nuclear-powered submarine is essentially the futuristic supersub of "The Hunt for Red October" made real.) Knowing this, all other nations have conceded the seas to the United States, a reason American forces can sail anywhere without interference. The naval arms race — a principal aspect of great-power politics for centuries — is over.

United States air power is undisputed as well, with more advanced fighters and bombers than those of all other nations combined. The United States possesses three stealth aircraft (the B-1 and B-2 bombers and the F-117 fighter) with two more (the F-22 and F-35 fighters) developed and awaiting production funds. No other nation even has a stealth aircraft on the drawing board. A few nations have small numbers of heavy bombers; the United States has entire wings of heavy bombers.

No other nation maintains an aerial tanker fleet similar to that of the United States; owing to tankers, American bombers can operate anywhere in the world. No other nation has anything like the American AWACS plane, which provides exceptionally detailed radar images of the sky above battles, or the newer JSTARS plane, which provides exceptionally detailed radar images of the ground.

No other nation has air-to-air missiles or air-to-ground smart munitions of the accuracy, or numbers, of the United States. This month, for example, in the second attempt to kill Saddam Hussein, just 12 minutes passed between when a B-1 received the target coordinates and when the bomber released four smart bombs aimed to land just 50 feet and a few seconds apart. All four hit where they were supposed to.

American aerial might is so great that adversaries don't even try to fly. Serbia kept its planes on the ground during the Kosovo conflict of 1999; in recent fighting in Iraq, not a single Iraqi fighter rose to oppose United States aircraft. The governments of the world now know that if they try to launch a fighter against American air power, their planes will be blown to smithereens before they finish retracting their landing gear. The aerial arms race, a central facet of the last 50 years, is over.

The American lead in ground forces is not uncontested — China has a large standing army — but is large enough that the ground arms race might end, too. The United States now possesses about 9,000 M1 Abrams tanks, by far the world's strongest armored force. The Abrams cannon and fire-control system is so extraordinarily accurate that in combat gunners rarely require more than one shot to destroy an enemy tank. No other nation is currently building or planning a comparable tank force. Other governments know this would be pointless, since even if they had advanced tanks, the United States would destroy them from the air.

The American lead in electronics is also huge. Much of the "designating" of targets in the recent Iraq assault was done by advanced electronics on drones like the Global Hawk, which flies at 60,000 feet, far beyond the range of antiaircraft weapons. So sophisticated are the sensors and data links that make Global Hawk work that it might take a decade for another nation to field a similar drone — and by then, the United States is likely to have leapfrogged ahead to something better.

As The New York Times Magazine reported last Sunday, the United States is working on unmanned, remote-piloted drone fighter planes that will be both relatively low-cost and extremely hard to shoot down, and small drone attack helicopters that will precede troops into battle. No other nation is even close to the electronics and data-management technology of these prospective weapons. The Pentagon will have a monopoly on advanced combat drones for years.

An electronics arms race may continue in some fashion because electronics are cheaper than ships or planes. But the United States holds such an imposing lead that it is unlikely to be lapped for a long time.

Further, the United States holds an overwhelming lead in military use of space. Not only does the Pentagon command more and better reconnaissance satellites than all the rest of the world combined, American forces have begun using space-relayed data in a significant way. Space "assets" will eventually be understood to have been critical to the lightning conquest of Iraq, and the American lead in this will only grow, since the Air Force now has the second-largest space budget in the world, after NASA's.

This huge military lead is partly because of money. Last year American military spending exceeded that of all other NATO states, Russia, China, Japan, Iraq and North Korea combined, according to the Center for Defense Information, a nonpartisan research group that studies global security. This is another area where all other nations must concede to the United States, for no other government can afford to try to catch up.

The runaway advantage has been called by some excessive, yet it yields a positive benefit. Annual global military spending, stated in current dollars, peaked in 1985, at $1.3 trillion, and has been declining since, to $840 billion in 2002. That's a drop of almost half a trillion dollars in the amount the world spent each year on arms. Other nations accept that the arms race is over.

2006-10-01 12:18:54 · 24 answers · asked by quarterback 2

I need to find out for my government class. Please help out a lil bit, i couldnt find it anywhere! thanks, i appreciate it!

2006-10-01 12:18:14 · 9 answers · asked by Heather 3

2006-10-01 11:51:08 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous

WHY?!?

2006-10-01 11:42:19 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-10-01 11:29:24 · 9 answers · asked by LSF 3

where 250,000 people have been killed and have no liberty?
Where are our valiant troops?
What no oil?

2006-10-01 11:19:24 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-10-01 11:16:30 · 14 answers · asked by noils 3

2006-10-01 11:03:13 · 15 answers · asked by Noble 4

if you have a 3.5 or above gpa in high school and score really high on the act. would navy seals be a good choice. what about getting a degree before you join.

2006-10-01 10:58:58 · 10 answers · asked by almostageniusbutsomuchtoknow 2

2006-10-01 10:38:02 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

2006-10-01 10:37:50 · 2 answers · asked by FLORIDA 4

regular infantry. They wont let him try to complete airborne school for another year due to his knee. My question is, could this delay his being deployed? We are set to be stationed at Ft Riley, Kansas and I dont know whether he would still be deployed or stay behind for a while due to his knee.
Please dont e rude about this. its a serious question

2006-10-01 10:15:39 · 7 answers · asked by ? 3

I was just wondering if anyone has ever just barely passed weight at MEPS and be turned down on ship date, because they gained a little weight? what happens? also, are there any other reasons why they may turn you down on shipdate? or are you already govt. property? I went last month and was barely over after they taped me, but i sweet talked the guy and he played with the numbers so i could pass, and told me that it better not come back to him. I was wondering what would happen if i was over again. I am really trying to gut under bmi so i dont have to worry about it. my ship date is on oct 17, what would make them send me packing wheter it be weight or anything else?

2006-10-01 10:10:19 · 11 answers · asked by daniel e 3

Following the lines of a previous question, where do we actually send personal care items and reading material to our troops overseas? I want to send things to all branches. Toiletries, I've written a few stories I could send, non-perishable goodies, and things of that nature.

2006-10-01 10:01:26 · 8 answers · asked by mindrizzle 3

Will they tell me to take my *** home and go to the doctor? The reason I ask is because my throat is swelled up beyond belief and my recruiter wants me to go to meps pretty soon. The damn ear nose and throat doc doesnt have an opening for like 2 weeks, and im not gonna waste my time going if thats what will happen. Plus the MEPS place is like 175 miles away, and that would be a huge waste of time, right?

2006-10-01 09:57:38 · 3 answers · asked by standanddeliver87 2

Recently there have been many intellectual debates on the fact that many Christian American couples are breeding children to supply the holy US army with Christian soldiers to fight in holy wars. The supply and demand factor in this debate is very though provoking.

Is the US government paying for all these couples to breed children for the army? Is the demand greater now than it was during past crisis?

I believe these couple are brave Americans! They breed them to fight our wars. They breed them to die for our freedom. They breed them to kill for us!

God bless America and all Christian faithfuls!

2006-10-01 09:52:14 · 12 answers · asked by Skyeboi 2