I mean sure Troops are expendable . Im just wondering how many will it take, Or do we just say well they knew the risks! Just like a police officer or a fireman before the they join know the risks . I hate to put a number on this but it took a lot of troops before we got out of vietnam ! How many?
2006-12-27 20:23:06 · 12 answers · asked by wishingstar5555 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
i said enough already before we invaded...but i dont want my husband to get killed while he is over there it scares me senseless...i am so sick of all this unnecessary murders going on over there...when will we realize it is our invasion that caused this insanity?!
2006-12-27 20:27:26 · answer #1 · answered by Jessy 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
If the troops are expendable then why do you care? And I dont want to leave Iraq until the JOB IS DONE. I agree that if we leave to early, they will become a terrorist state, which will only endanger American lives, and cause us to go right back in there. I am a PROUD Army wife and I want to stay until we are no longer needed in Iraq, Afghanistan, or where ever else we might need to go. My husband has deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, and getting ready to go again. I never want my husband to leave, but I am most proud of his work and support him 110%.
And I bet if you ask most troops, they will tell you that we should stay til the job is done. I live amid 20,000 plus troops and I know that is the consensus where we are. And the wives that I know feel the exact same way. The troops LOVE to do their job. And I am sorry that the media loves to focus on the few that dont want to go, but there are THOUSANDS who are ready. Many on 24 hour notice. Thankfully, you dont make the decisions about troops.
2006-12-28 01:58:16 · answer #2 · answered by an88mikewife 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You almost answered your own question. What is the difference between a soldier a police officer or a fireman? What are their job duties? To protect and serve, correct? Should police officers and firemen be relieved of duty because there is a possibility that they may lose their life by performing their duties? Of course not. You wouldn't want that now would you.
You seem pretty nonchalant in stating that troops ar expendable. I realize that is not the impression you are trying to give. It is unfair of you to put that statement inside of this question. No soldiers are expendable. The value of one life makes this war a pricey one. Right or wrong this War came about. AT THIS TIME we need to finish what we started.
Jessy, I am sorry you live in constant fear for your husband. I HATE that our men and women are having to put their lives on the line for any reason but they do and are. Do you honestly believe you are helping your husband by publicly not supporting his mission in Iraq? I find it amazing that you can not see the additional risk you put on him by doing this. This isn't about your fear. This is about his life and doing whatever is absolutely necessary to insure the additional chance that he walks out of Iraq alive and well.
I don't understand why people can't see that if we don't stand behind our troops AND THE MISSION they are there to complete that we are making the job harder for them and we ourselves are contributing to a portion of the casualties. *If* the enemy saw a united front of the citizens BEHIND the soldiers it would weaken their resolve. As it stands not they see people who are willing to throw in the towel, cut and run, accept the losses that we have already incurred and it strengthens their resolve.
So to answer your question, you tell us, how many men and women are we going to have to lose before YOU realize that questions and statements like this are not helping the cause.
It's time you realize the responsibility that falls on your shoulders for what is happening as well.
2006-12-27 21:11:18 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
As many as it takes.
You start a war and you have already said 'This war is right', 'this war is for the good of the country' and 'the individual is of no consequence next to the country'.
Stupid right? The only thing that will bring the troops back is a serious threat to the election chances of the next president. Well, since the current president will not be there anyway....no one will bother.
BTW I presume you speak of Iraq. If the US withdraw now then it will be ruled by a dictator that make Saddam look like a sunday school teacher. What passes for democracy there now will not last long.
2006-12-27 20:31:20 · answer #4 · answered by philip_jones2003 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Before, when there were no state of the art cameras that can show the 'real side of war,' we did what we had to do, fast, cold, hard. Now, because everyone is concerned about posing for a camera and how the reality of how horrible war really is, we are choking. Now I realize that our enemy's don't give a hoot about what they do on camera (heck, they'll lob off a person's head for your viewing pleasure, they don't give a damn), but it's time for the Coalition Forces to not be preoccupied about how bad it looks if they sweep through a town or shoot a man in the middle of a conflict that appears to cause danger. War is nasty, terrible business. We know this to be true, so it's time to stop pulling punches for the camera so we don't 'look that bad.'
You want to see our casualty count stop climbing so much, it's time to take off the kid gloves. We've played that game too long. It's time to start bare knuckling (which should have been the case from day one) and not be so nice to these people who are trying to kill us and the Iraqi people who just want to get along in life.
Yes, the insanity has got to stop and we have got to step it up several notches so we can do the job we went there to do... and not worry about what the rest of the world thinks. God knows, we would NOT be cutting off people's heads in the process... like our enemies do! But we can certainly stop worrying about hurting the feelings of people who see it on TV.
2006-12-27 20:40:30 · answer #5 · answered by Tony C 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The USA is between a rock and a hard place in Iraq. If we leave too soon there's a chance that Iraq could become a terrorist state. The invasion into Iraq has been very good for terrorists leaders like Osama. The invasion increased their recruits dramatically. If we stay for maybe 10 more years you can count on the casualties to increase proportionately.
2006-12-27 21:11:53 · answer #6 · answered by sparks 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
58,000 plus. was how many we lost in vietnam and as we all know that wasn't enough as we bugged out to soon.
The answer is as many as we need to get the job done. If people got up in arms about the number of crimes (murder) that happen just in the state of CA as they seem to be about the war, wouldn't we all be better off? The US lost more soldiers in one day in WWII (Normandy) than we've had in 3 years in Iraq. Casualties numbered 2400 on the beach at Omaha alone. There were no calls to pull out or whinning about how long we'd be in the war because Americans knew we had no other choice.
People act like they are upset about our casualties but if they truly were they wouldn't elect people like Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden to any office. They would be demanding a reform in our judicial system and the death penalty for the animals that roam our streets committing crimes. Our troops are volunteers that have committed themselves to a cause that they feel worthy of the risk. Shouldn't we all be behind them? Their answer is as MANY as it takes to get the job done and they are responding every day.
2006-12-27 21:11:20 · answer #7 · answered by John L 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
ok. the way i see things: yes, our troops knew EXACTLY what they where getting into when they signed their contract. but no, they are NOT expendable. just because they know what they signed up for doesn't mean we can toss them around like and spend their lives whenever the government wants. We're government property" so to speak, true. but some people talk about our troops as if their lifeless robots that we can just move and position anywhere. remember that they're living, breathing people. they're brothers, sister, husbands, wives, mothers, and fathers to many. but like i said, they knew what they were getting into when they signed their contract. many would love to end the war, but that doesn't mean they resent the fact that they joined. as for when we'll move out? when bush trips and falls and gets some sence knocked into him. he's already sending in the marine/army reserves and national gaurds. a bit freaky. simply put, bush just won't except anything short of victory it seems no matter how many troops we lose out there.
2006-12-27 20:52:40 · answer #8 · answered by LuvingMBLAQ 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
At the rate they are going it's going to be a long time before anywhere near Vietnam numbers are reached. Therefore the status quo may be more or less sustainable. I imagine there will permanent US bases in Iraq in any case.
2006-12-27 20:41:52 · answer #9 · answered by michinoku2001 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I suppose as many as it takes ..we sent them out there to kick @ss . but you should expect to get your @ss kicked also
at times sad as it may be ..
I see you don't mention any thing about the Iraqis being killed in droves ..I suppose there lives is not as important
as much..after all their only defending there homes ...
2006-12-27 20:37:04 · answer #10 · answered by JJ 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it will take as many as it does till the job is done,, YA'LL need to stop with this lets pull out BULL **** all the time and let us do our job for Christ sake, i get tired of hearing this **** all the time. we're here let us ******* finish our jobs so we can come home and not till then
2006-12-28 04:15:01 · answer #11 · answered by redneckmp28 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋