All through history, wars have been CAUSED by a few people, maybe just a handfull of people in power. However soldiers... poor ordinary citizens are the ones sent out to fight, and get killed. Why dont we change the rules .. let the Presidents get into a ring, slug it out, and who ever wins ..wins the 'war'! leave the soldiers out of it.. why should they continue to die in wars started by just a few people arguing over what the soldiers know little about?
2006-09-24 21:25:44 · 13 answers · asked by busola h 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
PS.. i make no reference to any particular war, just wars in general, any war ..So SLACKDOE.. dont get so uptight, who will it be 'too dangerous' for? the Presidents or the innocent soldiers and civilians..?i fully support the war on terror, but mabe not the way its being fought.
2006-09-24 23:01:26 · update #1
Now wouldn't that be something......the Presidents and World Leaders on the battlefield fighting hand to hand! I bet there would be less wars! Forget Bush.....he will choke on a pretzel and a beer!
2006-09-24 22:06:27 · answer #1 · answered by Fitforlife 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
When we get you out of toy land we can talk. First off your idea is dangerous. Second, there have been foul-ups in this war and that's a shame. Regardless of where it started, after 9/11 there was no choice but to hit somewhere. Death is part of war. However, I thought instead of losing American lives we should have went over and killed all the assholes. If there is a God he will sort them out. If the pathetic Al (dumb dumb) Gore were in office 9/11 we might be flying a different flag. God Bless America, and God Bless George W. Bush.
2006-09-25 05:53:06 · answer #2 · answered by Mr. Know 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I totally dig it.
A related note: If you read some of Tom Clancy's later novels (Debt of Honor & Executive Orders), his main character advances the policy of deliberately target the leaders of countries who cause wars with direct military action, such as dropping a 2000 lb bomb on some president's house.
2006-09-25 04:49:17 · answer #3 · answered by Atheist81 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
history has proved diplomacy is better than war.....look at ww2 where in 20 million people died....but then if a war has to be fought there must be a cause for it....a genuine cause that diplomacy cannot handle.....not like the orchestrated war on terror masterminded for taking away peoples lands , their rights and their oil.
2006-09-25 05:16:59 · answer #4 · answered by uknownotlove 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, if that happens, I'd vote for Schwarzenegger for president!! lol. Os some other big guy who can beat the crap out of any other foreign leader.
2006-09-25 10:30:45 · answer #5 · answered by thebetrayedprince 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Id pay top dollar to see that.....
In the red corner George Bush....and in the blue Ahmadinajad for Iran.....
anyone know where I can buy tickets
2006-09-25 04:46:02 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sounds cool.
2006-09-25 05:23:20 · answer #7 · answered by Avner Eliyahu R 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
bz the coyntry is under thier control
2006-09-25 04:33:03 · answer #8 · answered by cuty sweet 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There there'd be no wars... and officials dig that!
2006-09-25 04:27:51 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Prez's are all old , Bush lacks the balls .
2006-09-25 04:28:37 · answer #10 · answered by primamaria04 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋