Instead of always being on the defense, shouldn't we be more on the offense? We'd be the pursuers instead of the pursuees.
2006-09-25 10:16:39 · 6 answers · asked by artinmyheart 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Our military structure is flexible..we have defensive units such as an armored division..
Those take awhile to deploy and thus are more defensive in nature, only taking on offensive roles in a theater-size engagement. Other "defensive" forces would be our nuclear deterrent force..
Our offensive forces are those that can be deployed quickly such as any sort of light brigade, or a marine unit..or anything the navy has. So really it just depends on what kind of war you're wanting to fight. That is why our military is so flexible.
As far as being the pursuers instead of the pursuees goes..I'm going to assume you're not some sort of imperialist.. How can you know who to shoot at if you haven't been shot at yet? That is basically our mandate. As a country we try to take the higher ground when we can, which often exposes us to the sort of attacks that made you post this question.
But at least the next day we can look at ourselves and say we died like men..
2006-09-25 10:35:09 · answer #1 · answered by La Voce 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The War Department was renamed the Defense Department for reasons that have nothing to do with whether the American military is taking the fight to the enemy. It most certainly is, in case you forgot. Watch the news for Afghanistan and Iraq, if you need to be reminded, and don't fixate on titles.
2006-09-25 17:38:43 · answer #2 · answered by Nat 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We are on the offense, hence the pre-emptive clause in the National Security Strategy.
2006-09-25 17:19:13 · answer #3 · answered by rohannesian 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree-we should be Annexing countries. All empires had their time and the American Empire should include both all of North America and South America. We should invade and control Australia and make it a retirement community for all of us- not just the rich- we will make them spend their retirements in Bolivia or Paraguay.
2006-09-25 17:19:55 · answer #4 · answered by RHJ Cortez 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The Army is well- trained in both areas, defense and offense.
'Tis better by far to eat lunch than to be lunch.
2006-09-25 17:26:25 · answer #5 · answered by GreenHornet 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think the idea in theory is that you guys don't want to attack people who haven't attacked you. Oh wait...
2006-09-25 17:19:01 · answer #6 · answered by NinjaPirate 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋