Hello Viet-Nam, 20,000 more targets & an empty bank account !!
2007-01-09 02:30:09 · 11 answers · asked by astro 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
MMD, I'm a viet vet what are you ??
2007-01-09 02:42:10 · update #1
M1A1, what part of mistake are you not seeing??
2007-01-09 04:06:24 · update #2
I'm going to agree with you on this one!!
2007-01-09 03:18:04 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
South Vietnam fell when there was no U.S. soldiers in the area and Congress refused to equip South Vietnam. South Vietnam ran out of ammo and equipment and then it fell.
If the 20,000 were there to train Iraqi troops then it wouldn't be a wasted effort.
The problem now is in the clear and hold strategy. The U.S troops can clear, but it's taking awhile for the Iraqis to hold. There is probably more successes that the press is reporting too. The press has contracted their reporting to people that don't like the U.S. Body counts and damage has been known to be inflated by the Associated Press along with doctored photographs. From what I have read, the Iraqis should be in control of all their providences by the second quarter of 2008.
2007-01-09 13:28:16 · answer #2 · answered by gregory_dittman 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes it would be. We have already overextended our military. Even Bush's former Generals, before he got rid of them, said that sending in more troops was a bad idea. Congress and even some of his own Republicans are against him sending more troops.
2007-01-09 13:43:36 · answer #3 · answered by j 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The only actual blunder was turing war into this politically correct thing. Back before Vietnam, we used to just go in a blow the hell out of our enemy. Now we have to find a way to win without hurting their feelings.
2007-01-09 10:35:53 · answer #4 · answered by DOOM 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Of course. It's just a ruse so bush can save face & say "I tried, but the dems don't want it", or some such dribble. The truth is, bush no longer cares, Saddam is dead & that's all he cared about. Where is Osama bin forgotten?
2007-01-09 10:45:10 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No one knows for sure.
We'll find out in 3-6 months I suppose.
My instinct is that it isn't really going to help, but I'm waiting to see. I hope it does work.
2007-01-09 10:40:36 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Not even Ollie North, the Fox news war hack supports this move. Now what does that tell you?
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/01/08/ollie-north-is-against-the-mccain-doctrine/
2007-01-09 10:38:47 · answer #7 · answered by Third Uncle 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Just more cannon fodder for the New World Order.
2007-01-09 10:42:19 · answer #8 · answered by jswnwv 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I just love reading posts where people think that their political opinions qualify them to comment on military operations.
2007-01-09 11:27:59 · answer #9 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Viietnam number 2. It is wrong. How about if he sends his daughters to fight first? Then I may have more credibility in his motives.
2007-01-09 10:37:54 · answer #10 · answered by Shayna 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋