i mean the conflicts America was involved in. such as the Vietnam War which was a military conflict. or the Iraqi War going on now... thats just a conflict so why do we call them wars? or is it just easier to say war instead of conflict
2006-12-23 07:05:21 · 15 answers · asked by Dont get Infected 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
no a war is when congress goes and says that the US are in a state of war
2006-12-23 07:10:11 · update #1
im not saying anything bad aginst the soldiers that faught in those conflicts. god damn it seems when ever i say a name of a war or conflict people think im talking **** about the soldiers...
2006-12-23 07:17:44 · update #2
That's a good question. The Constitution says that only congress can declare war, yet the president sends troops into combat, just like Viet Nam, just like Korea. And congress stands there with their hands in their pockets.
What do we need congress for? We have a president that decides when and where to send troops. What are we paying the congress for?
2006-12-23 13:31:52 · answer #1 · answered by iraqisax 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Actually, there is a huge difference between a declared war and a conflict (or undeclared war) insofar as the rights of the military men are concerned.
2006-12-23 20:34:44 · answer #2 · answered by Polyhistor 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Vietnam was never an official war because congress never declared war. It was a conflict. Communist Russia was backing one side and we were helping the other side to resist. They were trying to contain communism. Vietnam Vets served a great purpose and should be recognized for helping Communism fall in Russia. Bill Clinton didn't do that, he actually opposed it! If they didn't resist we would have eventually been over run and not living in freedom... But we are free today, no thanks to John Kerry and gang...
2006-12-23 15:14:34 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The full name of the Vietnam fighting was The Vietnam Civil War. It was a war, before the U.S. got involved.
As far as the latest fighting, Congress did vote for the invasion of Iraq. That's where all the recent flip flopping (Hence John "I voted for it and against it" Kerry) attacks were about.
2006-12-23 17:44:19 · answer #4 · answered by gregory_dittman 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I believe you have that backwards. the problem is for one, we are in Iraq, but having said that we are there and we need to fight the WAR as a WAR. Take the politics out of it, and we'll be sending our troops home with a great victory, in a very short period of time.
2006-12-23 15:09:33 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
War or conflict it does not matter what you call it, everyone is just as dead.
2006-12-23 15:13:36 · answer #6 · answered by Jerry 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I spent a whole year in Iraq, if you went there too, you'd agree that it is a WAR. Pick up a weapon or shut the **** up.
2006-12-23 16:31:26 · answer #7 · answered by zrunner04 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
when a weapon is used a conflict becomes a war.
2006-12-23 15:08:43 · answer #8 · answered by ghancelik 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Because the Commander-in-Chief calls it a war. Peroid.
2006-12-23 15:21:28 · answer #9 · answered by donronsen 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Its a police action,you were the country that invaded,they had no conflict until you arrived.They had a twisted leader...well thats a common trait you share.
2006-12-23 15:17:04 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋