English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Of everything that is going on in the world, such as uncooperation between countries such as Iran, North Korea, Mexico and a few others. Would our American military be able to take on more than one county at a time, or would the American people have to also lend a hand?

2006-06-19 03:37:27 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Military

16 answers

It depends on the country and the support we get. If N. Korea test fires a nuke, we have the capability to knock it out of the sky and should, that would be enogh I think to make them step back and think about it. If we were to invade, we would need the assistance of the Chinese if for no other reason so they don't join the N. Koreans again.
As far as Iran we could take them out by air and never have to put some one on the ground. In reality we are already fighting them in Iraq.
As for Mexico, I really don't think they would want to try to invade us. That is the only way we would be at war with Mexico. We would easily defeat them economically and militarily, This is also where the American people would take up arms to defend our borders. It would be catastrophic for them to attempt this.

2006-06-19 07:43:57 · answer #1 · answered by Bill S 3 · 0 0

Mexico is political issue, their Army is no threat to anyone. Iran & North Korea could be problems. We have a lot of Military. Check any base in USA & there are a lot of them & they are full of soldiers not being used right now. We fight in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yugoslovia & a couple of other forgotten places (no Bush did not start most of them). We have fought more than one before & I think we could again. I hope we will not have to find out the ultimate answer, but I think we are ready to "lock & load".
There is a lot more joining the military than people want to believe, their numbers are not down. If it gets out of hand, the laws of the United States give the the opportunity to draft able body people.

2006-06-19 03:48:29 · answer #2 · answered by Wolfpacker 6 · 0 0

Many former generals have stated a lot a similar element, about the conflict, the career and about Bush and the full Bush Junta. this isn't some thing new. yet i ask your self why those generals wait until eventually they are competently out of the service to voice those concerns. Years in the past if those similar generals had marched into Bush's workplace and instructed him the conflict replaced into over many lives and who's conscious of what number billions of borrowed money would were kept. i visit understand loyalty, yet i visit't understand how straight forward straight forward sense shouldn't trump loyalty. I blame the 'administration' of the GOP for this conflict and career. Bush is only a stooge for those human beings which makes him a pitiful ascertain, yet some thing else of the GOP's political junta actual must have understand how badly this can end....and in the adventure that they did not then the total incompetency of those human beings stands printed. Sanchez did the right element by ability of coming ahead even at this overdue date, yet how significantly better appropriate would it not were if he had come ahead in the previous the first tanks rolled into Iraq?

2016-10-14 07:29:32 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

In a word...NO. We already cannot handle 2 at a time. Troops in Afghanistan and Iraq is leading to us not being able to have adequate forces to handle either the way we could have with a full and undivided force. Our military may be considered the best on the planet, but we cannot spread ourselves so thin that we are limiting our political options in dealing with other threats as a result.

2006-06-19 03:44:43 · answer #4 · answered by The Krieg 3 · 0 0

conscription could be on the cards for you guys... if your government does not stop putting its feet in places where they overstay there welcome!

that is why you guys in the voting positions, should be out on the streets, asking for the safe return of all your brothers and sisters...

you have already bit off more than you can chew... and everyone else has to follow suit, because of political blackmail...

bush, oh if i can't get my own way, i'll impose sanctions...

those people who the american government impose sanctions on (and the countries like our uk that back them)... those people who don't have a gun in there hand, normal civies like you and me... are the ones that are starting to take up arms against the u.s.... you would if you where starving... i would too!

I think, and i have said it before... there should be a global peace treaty... we all should set a president; and pull our troops out...

we can then set about, getting signatures for peace...

there should be a global contract signed, by every leader... which incorprates a code of conduct...

once this is complete and signed... there should be no going back...

there would be a global fighting force, which consists of every nationality... if any government oversteps the boundaries... then the world force would go in and force a change of leader... this will save arguements!

with this new found world of peace, we should then conquer space... with or global knowledge base!

2006-06-19 03:58:46 · answer #5 · answered by AZRAEL Ψ 5 · 0 0

ABSOLUTLY!! That's the way our military's built.If we were at war with Mexico,the Navy could pull into to Gulf of Mexico and fire missiles at shore,and provide air attack.While the airforce could provide air attack in numerous places,and coast guard will protect Americans from battle on American soil and then we'll have the army and Marines for the offensive to take out enemy militia.
U.S.A.!!!U.S.A.!!!U.S.A.!!!

2006-06-19 14:17:29 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I hope it doesn't come to that, but it depends what country your talking about, if it were a small country yes, it it was a country like iran which has something between 7 to11 million soldiers in it's basij militia, we'd probably be screwed

2006-06-19 04:17:07 · answer #7 · answered by mel18 2 · 0 0

The US can barely handle Iraq. If we went into multiple fronts, I see a draft as well as unprecedented public dissent (even greater than what we had in the 1960's during Vietnam)

2006-06-19 06:22:02 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

We're already fighting two wars at the same time. If Korea flares up, there's more than enouth South Koreans to shore up the 38,000 U.S. soldiers there.

2006-06-19 03:42:02 · answer #9 · answered by baq2calli 2 · 0 0

I think we're getting stretched pretty thin now, it something happened in Korea and we needed to send troops there we might be screwed. We would probably then start withdrawing troops from Iraq.

2006-06-19 03:46:44 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers