When will the USA declare war in the Middle East and stop acting as altruistic missionaries?

Question

Sept 11 was the worst terrorist attack in history
America's response? Conducting a war on Geneva Convention terms against an enemy that respects nothing
Why? Because we're 'better than that'
What boy-scout hogwash

The US has the military capability to end the conflict in Iraq (and the broader Middle East) in one week, yet this has dragged on for almost 5 years, with American and Allied soldiers dying daily, because the US seems more interested in the lives of Iraqis (and others) and in world opinion, than in protecting US citizens - including the soldiers

Never before in the history of warfare has this been done; trying to conduct a war and a humanitarian effort simultaneously
Look how successful it's been. No wonder the war-mongering Arabs hold us in contempt
War is very simple; it's a numbers game - kill enough people on the other side until there's no one left to fight you, or until they lose the will to fight anymore.

http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=2635

Take a look at the link posted above.

Answer 1

If you wage war, you wage it to win or not at all. Are we doing that ? I say emphatically no.

Food for thought; politicians cut their losses and sue for peace when they declare the war has been won, and then leave it to future generations to wage war again. Think about what I just said.

From a proud veteran of our United States Armed Forces and a staunch supporter of all men and women currently serving at home or abroad to protect our freedom!
Thanks for the question Brad.

Answer 2

So you would like another successful defeat as in Vietnam where the terrorist (read in guerilla, freedom-fighters, underground, etc) drove us out. While our soldiers are dying, you suggest that we escalate and destroy them....armchair generals are not good field commanders...to locate a single VietCong required over 200 men....it is a war of attrition and dedication to the cause, and after 20 years in Vietnam, we didn't have the dedication to continue the fight.....the soldiers could have done it but at home...they were baby-killers, etc...It really makes fighting men feel good to know they have no support. But the issue is not about us, it is the resolve of the Middle-Easterners to free their lands of foreign intruders...look at Afghanistan and their violent history with the British, then Russians and then Americans and we do not control that country....we make shows of bombing and such, but we can not control both a hostile people and a hostile land. They will never lose their will to fight, but we will! You might take pride in useless rhetoric that we are the best, but we can't deal with the determination that they have and the indifferent attitudes of our troops. In Vietnam, the disenchantment grew to such an extent that men refused to go on patrols because they did believe in the war any longer. A lot of the brutality to POWs is not cruelty but frustration because we can't prevent Americans from being killed. Wake up to the fact there are causes to war...not 9-11 but causes that span the last 50 years, even Vietnam could have been prevented but between the ambitious Pentagon and the State Department assigning people who didn't understand Asia, we got our butts kicked and to what avail....it's time to talk and not fight.

Answer 3

There must be genuinely NO help given to the two area from the U.S. a million) we've already screwed ourselves over from stepping into Iraq, and Afghanistan. We went right into a warfare devoid of lots wisdom of why we've been going to combat it. The extremist recommendations has yet to be reasoned with, and so we've become blamed for taking too lots action at some cases, and not sufficient for the period of alternative cases. 2) scuffling with interior the middle East is quite lots a various style of our elections. we've Democrats and Republicans, they have Muslim, Jew, and a slew of alternative religions. authentic, we don't go around killing the opposing party, yet that area of the international has performed the sport lots longer than we've, so as that they take diverse measures. 3) i in my view do no longer think of we ought to continually help the different international places for the subsequent 50 years. It would not carry us any repute, and we in many cases lose money interior the technique. in actuality, we even get pinned via fact the international bully or showoff. quite, we would be greater efficient off to guard ourselves and in basic terms shop trudging alongside with scientific advancements so as that solid ol' Stephen Hawking's prediction won't inevitably take place. P.S. there is not any could desire to apply my final sentence as a spin-off for yet another stephen verbal substitute. i replaced into in basic terms attempting to make a solid end for my argument.

Answer 4

We aren't taking the war to the fullest because the country is too divided on the issue--the two sides cancel each other out too much and neither gets their way. There's war, but it's limited war. Nothing is accomplished, and it is more costly in money and lives than either side's goals by themselves would cost. Put simply, we're too busy fighting ourselves to do anything else effectively, whether that is building peace or making war.

Answer 5

Will NEVER happen. If history tells you anything, Muslims cannot be converted, only driven underground. Look at the Crusades, they were meant to spread Christianity to Muslims and it never happened. If anything that would throw the world into a never ending war.

Answer 6

Never. It's time for the new Viet-Nam. The economy demands it. A bunch die, some people get rich. It's the cycle. Live with it. Or vote.

Answer 7

Wow, you're even more wacko then Bush.

Answer 8

DEATH TO THE ZEALOTS!! I WILL NOT REST UNTIL ALL ZEALOTS ARE DEAD!!