Cut & run in Vietnam AND Iraq?
Disgusting.
2006-12-15 11:00:19 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
the military knows how to win we have too many pussy's here in America you win the war by killing the people and breaking their spirit to fight. ww1 we killed civilians and won ww2 we killed civilians and won we lost korea and Vietnam because we did'nt kill the civilians we have to build a case against the insurgents in Iraq before we can kill them even though we know they are insurgents it still has to come from the command to kill this is a stupid policy and it is what is killing our soldiers
2006-12-15 11:11:31 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 4⤋
the US loses wars because it receives curious about this manner of excellent type of ridiculous wars with out obviously defined targets. issues are extra ****ed up than you would believe. the US doesn't wrestle to win wars. they wrestle to make money for the large organizations. The longer the warfare the further money that's made. US troops shelter poppy fields in Afghanistan. they're preserving the worlds friggin heroine furnish. Why no longer purely burn the poppy fields to the floor and be certain they don't come lower back? Why shelter them? It makes no sense how the US is battling wars. They obviously do not wrestle to win. the project somewhat isn't the military. there is so a lot extra to warfare than taking pictures undesirable adult males. the military purely does what it truly is advised. regrettably the military will continually be those to take the blame. no longer the fool politicians and grasping organizations who initiate the wars. think about positioned the British military in Vietnam and they'd have ended up chickening out purely because the US did. the biggest reason the US lost in Vietnam replaced into getting in contact contained in the first position. To their credit the US has received wars in cutting-edge heritage. lost in Vietnam received in Grenada received in Panama received in desolate tract typhoon received in Iraq from a military aspect of view.Saddam's Regime and the Insurgency were both defeated. i'd favor to remind you that the US led coalition took over Iraq in like 2 weeks. it truly is about as decisive a victory as you may have. The warfare replaced right into a political disaster even with the undeniable fact that the military did it truly is pastime as purely right they could. Will lose in Afghanistan. it truly is a stone age u . s . complete of backwards non secular followers. the US can't stabilize the country. The Taliban will come lower back once they go away the picture of how issues were in Vietnam. once the US left Vietnam South Vietnam crumbled and replaced into overwhelmed by the NVA. the US will end dropping wars at the same time as they end battling unnecessary wars.
2016-11-26 21:45:59 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I get tired of questions like this. There is no war in Iraq. The opposing government/army was long ago removed from power, so effectively, we won the "war". Mission accomplished. What you have now is an OCCUPATION, which can have no solid objective since a government's stability is always uncertain. It's a simple question: do you want to sacrifice young Americans' lives to help provide stability to Iraq's fledgling regime? Not me. They've got everything they need to fend for themselves. I'm a registered independent, U.S. Army vet, and staunch critic of our chicken-hawk infested white house. For all those anxious to send my brothers to die in Iraq (Afghanistan is another matter), put down your keyboard and pick up a rifle. Or at the very least stop whining about your taxes. After all "Freedom isn't free".
2006-12-15 12:26:52 · answer #3 · answered by Sam C 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No.
It only knows how to start them, which is easy enough, but it just can't finish them.
It really isn't the U.S.'s fault though, since we are fighting an invisible enemy.
There might not be such a thing as a win-able war in humanity's future.
2006-12-15 11:27:15 · answer #4 · answered by STILL standing 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Certainly not the Bush administration. Our troops are taking prisoners in Iraq, holding them for 24 hours, handing them over to the Iraqis which end up releasing them just so that our troops can capture them again a week later and the cycle just keeps going on and on and on just like the energizer bunny.
2006-12-15 11:16:21 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
RC is correct. You win wars by attrition. Which means you kill the enemy until they no longer have the means or the will to fight. There are no innocent civilians in war!
2006-12-15 11:18:53 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
If the liberals would support the US, we would kick some butt and come home.
Never underestimate the value of a good cheerleader!
2006-12-15 11:19:24 · answer #7 · answered by ? 7 · 3⤊ 3⤋
USA has changed its strategy on wars. It just invade and leave without accomplishing the mission.
2006-12-15 11:13:01 · answer #8 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 1⤊ 4⤋
Of course, but we keep getting involved in nation building, which never turns out well.
2006-12-15 11:08:40 · answer #9 · answered by Asphycsia 3 · 4⤊ 3⤋
No.
We've got too many people claiming peace is the answer.
I mean, how could you argue with a car bomb? Holding a flower and being blown to bits makes you the bigger man.
2006-12-15 11:09:10 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 5⤋