With one war after the other and with the huge profits that corporations are making with these God-awful wars, the time will come when they will take any able-bodied person into the U.S. military.
It won't matter if they are men, women, gay, straight, 15, or yes, even 55 year old grandmothers.
Good question, and let's pray that God deals with Bush, and the warmongers before they actually do get Armageddon started.
.
2007-02-06 01:34:25
·
answer #1
·
answered by Brotherhood 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
18 year is the legal age in the United States to do almost everything beside drinking alcohol. That boy is old enough to think and vote. He can also smoke.
If he was killed yesterday, that means he is old enough to understand the consequences of joining the military in the middle of two wars. It's not like if he signed up prior to 9/11 where the thought of going to war for most people does not exist. He should know that once he finish basic training (plus more advance trainings) that means he is an able body to go over there. It's not like the military sending this boy without proper training. In a matter of fact, the Army doesn't let soldiers go to Iraq if he/she has not finished their qualification trainings.
You go back to the previous wars, there were plenty of 18-year-old soldiers who died for this country.
We are running out of people who are willing to join the military. From all the armed services, the Army has a hard time to recruit people, but less Americans are willing to go to war. I think that is normal. Once the news starts rolling, no matter how we justify the war or make it "popular" or "unpopular", most people are horrified with the violence of war and they tend to not wanting to become soldiers.
2007-02-06 01:42:58
·
answer #2
·
answered by Steve 1
·
2⤊
0⤋
Cannoli had answered you the perfect expected answer some infants were shot in Gaza the answer was the same A little boy was sleeping next to his father in his bed room ,he died of a shot ,then you must expect the same answer , I wish if i heard some saying that he is sorry , the maximum we hear an investigation is carried out,but unlikely to hear later that the investigation led to condemn at least such acts the Kufr Qasem massacre is the example that might show you what to expect Kufr Qasim is a small village inside the called green line,by 1957 as I recall the village was put under curfew by mid day for any reason under earth, by that time villagers were not at home ,they were in fields and know nothing about this curfew , by evening they were back ,and some Israeli soldier had stopped them at the village main entrance, they stopped one next to another for hours, through these hours the soldiers were consulting head quarters what to do with these villagers. later on all were shot and killed of course there were an invistigation ,and later was a trial , all were pulled to see the Israeli justice how it will be applied many pple attended this trial,including jornalists,and later it was a film .you see the judge at the end brought the verdict.what was it " THE SOLDIER IS INNOCENT AND THE OFFICER HAS TO PAY HALF A PENNY" many of the court attendance has paid this half a penny to release the officer In Kufr Qasem once you enter this village you may pass by a semi round about in which you see the names of the Palestinians are written on it
2016-05-23 23:15:59
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
First off who are you to say that these soldiers are "unexperienced"? I am a 23 year old soldier serving my tour in the desert and not one of us is inexperienced. Each one of these fine americans joins at the age of consent, 18, to fight terrorism and to keep it from crossing the atlantic over here. Who cares what russia does, they are starving freezing commies, way to go with using those winners as an example. If you had any concept of patriotism or pride in these soldiers, these young heroes, you would not ridicule them by calling their mission the "meat grinder". Keep watching the Communist News Network and keep letting them think for you since you cant handle the concept of war. I wonder what you would have said during WWII when the Nazis where razing Europe and thousands of Americans gave their lives to keep the world free. I bet that was a hell of a "meat grinder" huh? There is little difference today. Radical Islamics want to kill all "infidels" as their propaganda states and rule the world, just like the Nazis. So to summerize all this up as Im sure your attention span wore out, These young soldiers want to keep their country safe, and they would pay the ultimate price for it. Something you might never understand.
2007-02-06 01:56:01
·
answer #4
·
answered by the Animal 3
·
1⤊
2⤋
Princess Link was certainly younger than 18 when he saved your *** from Ganon.... But seriously, 18 is an adult in this country and this is part of the argument that 18 year olds should be allowed to drink.. I mean if you can die... And to be honest you "could" be on the frontline at 17 if your birthday worked out that way, assuming your parents gave permission for you to join. If they made our soldiers wait until 21, a) youd have no one on the frontline and b) youd be at the point where you would have a almost less than a year left to serve anyway.
I guess I don't see the difference. Russia may have the luxury of not allowing 18 year olds to go to the front at this point... how did Russia fight in WWII ? im curious...
2007-02-06 01:30:48
·
answer #5
·
answered by Dylan m 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
In U.S. Constitution mandated drafted into the armed forces started at 18 after high school. Boot camp training will take about 3 months or more depends on type of armed force, those who are born at the end of the year will definately look younger than those at year beginning . There are quite a number of young boys who are 17 but altered their birth cert as 18 in order to joint the forces zealously through out U.S. history. These soldier boys after their training may likely send to the front line by rotation shift to replace those drafted soldier who has completed their duty contract and return home.and they will always under the watchfull eyes of seasoned experienced NCO in their squad. As happened in 2nd World War, a lot of 18 yr-olds unfortunately killed in the front line. In all branches of U.S. armed forces, they will start recruiting school leavers with many incentives and bonuses after their services has ended, and it may not be surprising that some of them will get killed on their duty.
2007-02-06 01:52:56
·
answer #6
·
answered by old timer cheetah 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Just remember, our military is a volunteer military. Yes, it's sad, but honestly, they knew what they were getting into when they signed up for it. I say that because I had volunteered for the military. My husband is right now in Iraq, and he and I both know what he's getting into. His brother is infantry in the Army, and loves it. He's done two tours in the sandbox and will soon be doing a third.
It's incredibly unfortunate when one of our soldiers dies, but they are not ill-trained or uneducated when it comes to battle. They've had the same training as the 25 year old that's out there for the first time as well.
2007-02-06 01:31:08
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
Well first of all, American soldiers aren't governed by Russian military regulations. Secondly, yes we are running out of soldiers. America's internal rules are to send them home after one year, and they can't have a cumulative total of over three years (I think it's three years). They've raised the maximum entry level age of new recruits and loosened the guidelines. Finally, and probably most importantly, that 18-year old's death was tragic, but he was properly and thoroughly trained when he went over there. I see from your amendment that you've been around--how many 18-year olds died in Korea and Vietnam?
2007-02-06 01:34:43
·
answer #8
·
answered by Fearless Leader 4
·
1⤊
3⤋
Are we running out of soldiers, NO! Why do we send 18 year olds into battle. We do not! We send soldiers into battle that are well trained, well equipped, well disciplined and have more moral standards than most adults. They are the best fighting men that one can train. Age has nothing to do with combat readiness!!
2007-02-06 01:30:19
·
answer #9
·
answered by tbird 3
·
2⤊
3⤋
You ever met these 18 year olds that you call "inexperienced"? I live on an army post, and I assure you, they are neither inexperienced, nor afraid to go. They are READY....they WANT to go....the ones I talk to didnt sign up for the army to sit in garrison and train. My husband is one of them...while he isnt one of those inexperienced (so called) that you refer to, he is READY to go...he WANTS to go fight, get the job done, and come home. He doesnt want to sit in garrison either. He wants to go do his job!! He has bravely fought through a deployment to Afghanistan, and Iraq, and is about to go to the middle east for the 4th time! You should be PROUD that these young soldiers are willing to sign up for the military in a time of war!
So until you actually talk to some of these young soldiers and know what they do and do not want to do, DO NOT SPEAK FOR THEM!!!!!!! I can speak for them because I have talked to them, I LIVE AMONG "THEM" and I am married to one! While I am sure there are some who are afraid, they do their job anyway. And some would like to weiney out like Watada, but the ones I know, are ready to fight. So SHHHHHH!!!
2007-02-06 02:52:00
·
answer #10
·
answered by an88mikewife 5
·
2⤊
1⤋