I know this is a quite different approach but having people in the house makeing decisions and stopping Bush's surge. It seems like the best way to decide these soldiers futures as well as intent to fight is to actually ask them. They are on the deck plates, they are experiencing things first hand.
2007-02-18 03:38:30 · 12 answers · asked by Southern-Snowboarder 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
free-thinking military=terrible idea
Last thing you want is the military to decide they can think for themselves and do as they wish
2007-02-18 03:44:38 · answer #1 · answered by Go Blue 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, we must let liberals like Clinton and Kerry decide for them. Like Kerry said, soldiers are too stupid to know what to do. This is why Gore ordered his lawyers to try to not have the votes of thousands of soldiers in Florida counted when he wanted those endless recounts in 2000, but only in Demonrat areas.
We cannot risk having people who have actually served in Iraq make decisions. They know too much and tend to agree with Bush.
Yes, I'm being sarcastic. 5 of my cousins have been in Iraq, 4 Marines, 1 Army, and all 5 voted for Bush after they had been in Iraq over a year, and all 5 still support our mission there.
Soldiers know too much, so they cannot be trusted. That's the liberal line, and Clinton, Kerry, Obama, Kennedy, Murtha, Pelosi, etc. will do all they can to make sure the soldiers are not heard, just like Al Gore did in the 2000 election.
2007-02-18 12:49:06 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I disagree completely. One of my good friends is a Vietnam combat vet, in his head, he's still a soldier. He went from a seventh day Adventist who never drank or smoked, to a cigarette and weed smoking, alcoholic killing machine and I believe he would happily return. When a young person making friends in the military goes into conflict and his buddy gets his head shot off, it's personal and of course they want to keep fighting. Sometime when we are caught up in a highly emotional, adrenalin filled time, we don't make the best of decisions.
2007-02-18 11:49:49 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No- It would create a split -For/Against- among
people who have to follow whatever LEGAL orders they receive.
And which troops would vote ? Those in recruiting offices in Kansas & Hawaii ? Those
due to leave the Danger area in a week ? Would their vote be equal to that of a radar technician in California ?
2007-02-18 11:53:51 · answer #4 · answered by jcha 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Since every soldier, sailor, Marine, Airman, and Coastie in Iraq volunteered for military service (there is no draft), then in effect they have voted.
Also many are re-enlisted for multiple tours.
Doesn't that say anything to you?
2007-02-18 11:46:15 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
They don't get to vote on the war--any more than Congress or the American people. Bush is the Decider. You sound like you think this is a democracy orsomething!
2007-02-18 11:44:22 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Liberals wouldn't go for that because the last election showed, over 85% of our military personel over there supported the mission and wanted to stay.
2007-02-18 11:43:49 · answer #7 · answered by jack_scar_action_hero 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No. but we should have more soldiers in Iraq speaking out.
2007-02-18 12:15:45 · answer #8 · answered by ALunaticFriend 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That is a frighteningly bad idea. Civilian control of the military preserves our form of republican democracy.
2007-02-18 11:42:45 · answer #9 · answered by Tom Jr 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We fight.
I don't ask a platoon leader if he wants to go on patrol, I tell him what he needs to find out or what he needs to focus on during that patrol. That's the way it is and it works fine like that.
We are here to win. Just let us do it.
2007-02-18 11:51:40 · answer #10 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋