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

1966 Deathtoll went berzerk in Vietnam: 5,008. We were sending in more troops to get the job done. (1967:: 9,378) (1968::14,954) (1969:: 22,000) Thats 58,226 U.S. soldiers "spent" in that war. The American people protested. They were told repeatedly that if we left Vietnam, they would come here and attack our freedom because they didn't like it. Right now we are talking about sending in more troops to Iraq to get the job done ... again. This isn't going to be another Vietnam. Its going to be worse. Isn't it easier and safer to defend our country, IN our country? We have the technology, we have the manpower, and we damn sure have the money. We will never stop every militant terrorist in the mideast, thats the nature of a people who honestly believe they are doing whats right. What is it about this that we can't comprehend? Why can't we come back home to our families and defend from our coasts and borders? I'm so over this place!

2006-11-11 18:15:19 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Military

Thank you, all military personell and Vets. I will take your words into consideration as I further study this comparison. And those there right now, I know rather than fighting for politics or power, you are fighting for eachother. Keep up the professional work until you are able to come home. Hats off. Vietnam vets, the government may have forgotten you, but I haven't. My father served in WW2 and korea as an army Ranger, and he would never would tell me anything about what it was like or what he did, he absolutely refused and beat my *** for persuing the matter. I can only respect that and him and others like him. Very deep respect.

2006-11-11 18:57:46 · update #1

10 answers

I went over in 64. Came home in late 65.You should start counting in 65 when the build up started. The first big numbers was when Hal Moores Air Cav. got shot up at L.Z. Xray. Then there 2nd. Battalion got shot up even worse by walking out to Albany. The brass really screwed the pooch on that. They could have been air lifted out of X Ray but the brass wanted them to march to L Z Albany. Nobody ever explaned that. There were big numbers them couple of days. Hats off to the 7th. Air Cav.

2006-11-11 18:45:38 · answer #1 · answered by c321arty 3 · 3 0

It takes time for the real thing to come out. George W. Bush admitted himself that things have not been going well in Iraq. Now, he fires his stuff and puts the new one. For what reason. I still would not give him the vote. Iraq has become a carcus of death since US intervened in the Saddam's regime. Every day there are double digit deaths of innocent civilians and soldiers. I don't see progress in Iraq. Do you?! It will take some time untill american people with have to open their eyes whether they want to or not and realize that a change must be undertaken, and that is fast. Iraq will never be a democratic country. Maybe a separated country, but as long as the bodies pile up like leftovers of a butcher, we will never see peace in Iraq. The resistence is not so much of a resistence. The insurgents want to kick the international bodies out of the country and settle the issue straight. There are three different kinds of peoples and they don't want to be under a single government.

2006-11-11 18:27:53 · answer #2 · answered by shkabaj 3 · 1 0

There is a rather large difference in the two wars. In Vietnam, begining in 1950 and up until 1965, US involvment was limited to training and advisors. They spent most of their time up until 1965 training the S. Vietnamese Army. Large numbers of Combat Troops didn't begin arriving until late 1965. So accurizing your comparison, First 3 yrs. of COMBAT in Vietnam: 29,340, First 3 yrs of COMBAT in Iraq: 2,314. Yep it's another Vietnam, NOT.

So you should really START with 1966. Also you should define when you are going to start counting from. BETTER YET, read up on the history of the war you are comparing IRAQ to BEFORE you start spouting gibberish from some liberal minded pundit! If you don't know what you are talking about, you probably should be listening instead!

2006-11-11 18:32:54 · answer #3 · answered by Star G 4 · 0 3

Hi,,, look pardner,,,, not trying to bust your ego. but as a Vietnam Vet and a Desert Shield/Storm Vet,, things have changed on the battle field a lot...

When they took down the twin towers and showed that they could do destruction here, it was necessary to take the battle elsewhere, not in our own back yard....

No war , is good, ,people die,, thats a fact,,,, right or wrong

2006-11-11 18:25:34 · answer #4 · answered by eejonesaux 6 · 3 1

As stated before your premise isn't sound. They can't be compared. Advisors vs Actual combat. Apples and Oranges. As for the last your last statement what are suggesting? We militarize our population? Armed citizen walking around the shopping mall with weapon in hand? Check points at major intersections with personnel and vehicle searches? Martial law? I'm/we are over "there" right now doing those exact same things "here" so you don't have to do them in your neighborhood. Which would you rather see? Me on TV in Afghanistan and Iraq or me walking down your street in full battle rattle? Please leave decisions like this to the professionals. Don't try this at home.

2006-11-11 18:44:55 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

i understand the variety you experience. My brother replaced into protection rigidity and characteristic been given out basically in the past than the conflict... he certainly knowledgeable some squaddies which would be in Iraq on his way out. Any quantity of deaths I view with a heavy heart. those are our boys, our females... regrettably, i do no longer think of of human beings will supply up using the be extensive conscious "in person-friendly words" till the numbers attain Vietnam proportions. i think of of human beings additionally do no longer understand that we are having plenty extra suitable human beings stay to tell the story injuries that weren't surviveable in the past. it somewhat is not that we are taking much less casualties, it somewhat is that we are having extra suitable survivors. they have a burden to hold, too. yet they grant the effect of being forgotten by potential of the media... or in person-friendly words a p.c.. few very advantageous circumstances get coated. yet I shop listening to added and extra techniques approximately squaddies who're no longer getting insurance through very sluggish bureaucratic technique to get referred to as wounded. Mr Marine... I savour your frustration with human beings over talking approximately negativity from the conflict in Iraq... yet you are able to understand, we are legitimately in touch approximately our troops. those are our girls and boys! Why attack the asker and tell them to % up and meet up? Our girls and boys on the on the spot at the instant are not getting the scientific care they deserve! does no longer that hassle you in the slightest degree?

2016-12-10 07:34:04 · answer #6 · answered by livesay 4 · 0 0

47 million abortions since Roe V Wade. Go figure?

2006-11-11 18:24:52 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4 2

You just asked this question. I know as I answered it. So consider my first answer as applying here.

Thanks.

2006-11-11 18:18:57 · answer #8 · answered by iraq51 7 · 2 1

lets just nuke the hell out of them then they will know who the boss

2006-11-11 19:12:44 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

i always say as long as its not me or my family.
dont worry about irrelevant stuff like this.

2006-11-11 18:23:13 · answer #10 · answered by Luis D 3 · 0 3

fedest.com, questions and answers