The Iraq situation is not a WAR, it's an INVASION. We have an army INVADING a country and a bunch of lunatic INSURGENTS with hand weapons, homemade grenades, and other mundane weapons are attacking us. They have no tanks, artillery, or planes so this is NOT a war. Get your terms straight.
2006-07-28 06:08:28 · 12 answers · asked by Kookoo Bananas 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
You are right, exactly like the vietnam invasion.
and i dont think they are lunatics, they just dont want a US soldier asking them to stop, strip, empty their pockets and telling them when they can go out, sleep, eat.
2006-07-28 06:14:50 · answer #1 · answered by theedge 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
They had all of those. We removed their tanks, artillery and planes. Thus it was (AND IS) a war. Simply because the don't have those types of weapons anymore dosn't change the cituation. It started as a war and remains as a war. We didn't start fighting insurgents, we were fighting a standing army with the full complement of equipment.
2006-07-28 13:19:06 · answer #2 · answered by billybetters2 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
this can be ended if we want to .BUT it seems to be making americans richer and we can not end it to soon for them .I propose increased use of air to ground weapons around the perimeter of several cities in IRAQ . SHAKE the ground but good until they are willing to pile every wepon in the center of town for collection .THE scary part would be to arrange a pull out of all troops in one night and begin the booming the following night .
this will show these radical nuts we are done playing games .WAr is not meant to drag on indefinetly and thats all we seem to do any-more .NOT one soldiers life is worth staying another day in IRAQ until we attempt to have the people disarm copletely or accept the leveling of every city in IRAQ .give them a warning tell them we are going to do it and then from air and sea launch an attack the like the people there have no concept of .we need to break out the heavy equipment and stop this fooling around .
2006-07-28 13:19:35 · answer #3 · answered by playtoofast 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Iran or Iraq, I wanted the check out your definition, so I went to the American Heritage dictionary. Here's the definition:
War:
1. A state of open, armed, often prolonged conflict carried on between nations, states, or parties.
2. The period of such conflict.
3. The techniques and procedures of war; military science.
Since it's open, armed, prolonged and conflictual, between us and the parties involved, it seems that this invasion also fits the definition of a war. I guess an invastion can also be a war, that they aren't mutually exclusive.
2006-07-28 13:17:13 · answer #4 · answered by NHBaritone 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I agree, just like Vietnam, it wasn't a war it was a conflict, and somehow saying we lost the Vietnam conflict doesn't sound as bad as saying we lost the Vietnam War. Usually invasions don't last that long before they turn into occupations, when will that be?
2006-07-28 13:29:10 · answer #5 · answered by ranger12 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Fight Islamic fascism!
Liberty Over Liberalism!
2006-07-28 13:11:27 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
We aren't in Iran??????LOL
If you mean Iraq I use quotation marks on the word "war" in my Q&A....and you have labled me as a neocon?
2006-07-28 13:13:30 · answer #7 · answered by mymadsky 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Iran or Iraq?
2006-07-28 13:11:19 · answer #8 · answered by thepolishdude 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your right on with that . I have never called it a war , it's not .
2006-07-28 13:18:06 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
NON-Proliferation treaty violation learn about treaties and what they mean, also learn about perjury and what it means you guys are just hate.
2006-07-28 13:12:29 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋