2007-02-19
12:06:40
·
28 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Military
rukidding - no it is "enlightenment". Study the facts son, you'll catch up someday. You might even be able to handle questions about the the brutal US occupation of Iraq someday.
2007-02-19
12:21:17 ·
update #1
around_the _world_Jenny - um, you signed up and should have thought of that before, stop whining and start winning.
2007-02-19
12:30:26 ·
update #2
mferunden - you are destroying another people's culture, family structure adn right to life for a war concocted by the US elite, the corporate elite, for oil... OIL. why not follow me and reject this mission because it has nothing to do with defending the US from attack, and everything to do with capitalist plunder and world domination.. read some history. ROME? ENGLAND? it is EMPIRE son EMPIRE and you did get fooled I hate to say. Blind patriotism does that. Get home safe and figure it out... don't kill any Iraqis in the meantime please, they never did anything to your family.
2007-02-19
12:44:49 ·
update #3
Thank you. We must not have studied well enough in school and got stuck in Iraq. We are so stupid we need help from people like you and John Kerry. Your comments and the comments of your brothers and sisters show that you do not support the troops. You think we are a bunch of stupid, mind-numbed robots. We are suffering, bleeding and dying to keep the terrorists from attacking US soil. Remember the 1st WTC, the USS Cole and the embassies in Africa, they all happened in the 1990s. Where were you? Where will you be when they return? Cowering under a rock while the US Military fights back? Will you blame Congress for weakening the US? Will you realize the comfort you are giving our enemies? I doubt it. You will blame the military and find a way to "rationalize" in your mind that it was somehow Bush's or Reagan's or Rumsfeld's fault. I prefer you keep quite or grab a weapon and follow me.
2007-02-19 12:31:18
·
answer #1
·
answered by mferunden 2
·
1⤊
2⤋
As a veteran, I can say that's kind of a raw question. In a way, I almost think that only people who've served should have a weighted opinion on this.
I don't agree with what the Bush admin has done with our service members in this fight. I believe there are people out to get us, I'm just not sure that troops have been deployed effectively.
Who will protect the military? Veterans, and people who do some research on the issues involved and vote.
2007-02-19 12:24:09
·
answer #2
·
answered by mattzcoz 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
those who said the US Military is fine? well lets see if a soldier dies in Iraq, Under Bush's changes, the soldiers bloody gear is paid for by his life insurance, as well as any weapons damaged or destroyed during his fight, so the new 400,000 of lifeinsurance normally is dwindled down to about 100,000. Also if a soldier dies during friendly fire the family has to fight for life insurance to be paid, if a soldier dies at home in a car accident our life insurance doesn't cover us, Bush was also against the pay raise we got from congress last year and against the upcoming pay raise for 2008 I'm sorry I've been in the military for 2 1/2 years and am a Specialist, I make $19,000 a year I am also a Military Policeman, my civilian counter parts average pay for 40 hours a week is between $45-85,000 a year and gets pretty damn close to the same benefits as us. The us military does need help both at war and living at home.
2007-02-19 12:27:47
·
answer #3
·
answered by armyboysmith 1
·
2⤊
1⤋
Well if you hadn't ill advisedly broken away from the Great British Empire the monarch's most important role is to reign in out of control Prime Ministers and colonial governors who in practice have more power than presidents but don't formally/legally control the King or Queen's military. Republics invariably implode eventually, you've done well to last this long.
2007-02-19 12:14:07
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
Sorry to say, but the U.S. military had already become Bush's private army. Bush sends the U.S. military to any war of his own choosing. There's nothing that the congress, you, or me can do about it. Bush had thought of himself as the new Julius Caesar or Napoleon.
2007-02-20 03:31:16
·
answer #5
·
answered by roadwarrior 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The only protection we need is from hysterical defeatists who see a calamity in every wisp of smoke...
We'd be kicking *** in Iraq right now if 1) Rumsfeld had listened to Shinseki and put enough boots on the ground, and 2) If every swinging richard on the talk-TV could shut their yappers and let us fight without second guessing every damn thing.
2007-02-19 12:23:55
·
answer #6
·
answered by around_the_world_jenny 2
·
2⤊
1⤋
No, who will protect the US military from the Democrats! When they decide to cut or slowly melt the war budget??
2007-02-19 13:29:03
·
answer #7
·
answered by J S 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
People in the military are not worried about President Bush. They are worried about being betrayed by people like you.
2007-02-19 13:24:48
·
answer #8
·
answered by MikeGolf 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Well, the Democrats tried, but the Republicans voted to send even more troops.
2007-02-19 12:14:10
·
answer #9
·
answered by First Lady 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
Good question.
Lt. Watada is trying to.
It looks like some were trying with that weekend blast at bush's 'evidence' about Iran. But it's traitorously long overdue.
2007-02-19 12:10:11
·
answer #10
·
answered by t jefferson 3
·
4⤊
2⤋