Would U.S. SOLDIERS Please Answer Questions?

Question

-How responsably do you think U.S. troops are being deployed?

-How well do you feel the U.S. Public is informed by the Presdient and other officiasl about current military operations?

Answer 1

Not responsably at all. Our troops still don't have all the equipment they need (like armor for convoys), and the military is just like political or corporate organizations. Ever heard the expression "It's not what you know, it's who you blow."? Many leaders are incompetent.
The prez and other officials only tell us what they can't hide.
Notice how long-winded the answers from the rabid right are? Long winded liars, or stupid fools. Maybe both.

Answer 2

1. Very responsibly. The issue the Military faces is still from the drawdown of the 90s. The so-called "peace dividend" where only the terrorists and non-friendly nations cashed in. It takes a long time and A LOT of money to rebuild a professional Armed Force. Even if we had the volunteers to double the size of the force (back to 1991 levels), it would take two years, minimum, to field anything effective.

2. The President tells the truth and so does his staff. The "other officials" I would have to assume means Pelosi, Murtha, Kerry, CNN, the AP, Reuters, the "anti-war" leftists.

Let's see, Pelosi and Murtha were just here in Iraqi. Oddly, they did not want to talk to us Soldiers/Marines/Airmen. They went about their little parade, got a photo op, and left to continue pissing on us.

Kerry visited a month or two before I get here and the US Service Members avoided him like the plague. Kerry didn't do much to reach out to us at all. Maybe he was intimidated by the fact most of the Armed Forces have a college education and held a GPA he could only dream of. Maybe he got the hint that we despise him. He went back and continued to spread his filth and lies.

Now for the AP/Reuters/CNN: "Photoshop" should be all I have to say, but I can add fake sources (AP's "Mosque burnings" source that never existed). I can also ask how the media knows EXACTLY where and when to set up their cameras to catch a VBIED in a market and get casualty numbers out before the Iraqi Police and Coalition Military can even get to the attack site?

Kind of makes us wonder. As it is, whenever I even see a camera filming a location, I expect something bad to happen.

Which brings me to another point. According to many erroneous reports, my LSA has been destroyed at least 3 times. Oddly, I cannot find any bomb hits, nor was I able to recall any attacks. My poor wife emails me asking if I am fine after the "attack" only to find out that nothing happened.

It is not like the US Military is not putting this stuff out. Go to any of the Services' web pages and you will see the press releases. Unfortunately, the only press releases the main stream media is concerned with are the terrorist's and Iran's.

The media left the truth behind a long time ago in pursuit of some idiotic partisan goal. And the world suffers for it.

As for the “anti-war” groups, I am sick of people crying “Bush Police State” when none exists. Code Pink sent $600,000 to terrorists in Falluja but nothing happened to them. They even brag about it on their web page! If this were a “police state”, none of these protest groups would be able to take to the streets. But they can, and they get away with quite a bit of destruction and mayhem. But the left never let facts and truth get in their way.

I call these groups “anti-war” because they are very PRO-war: They are for any war where the US is defeated. This is shown time and again in their signs and hateful idiocy. You can even see their insanity in the link below, which is simply a collection of unedited photos and video from the protests. The fools hold up signs stating “Bush is Hitler” while the sign next to it says “Kill all the Jews”!!!! A little ‘projectionism” on the Hitler reference is it not?

The cruel irony is, if the terrorists win and destroy the West (their stated goal), the leftists will be the first heads on the chopping block.

Answer 3

US servicemembers are deployed in support of US objectives.

In general the troops feel that our objectives are legitimate and achievable.

The President and the DOD have been attempting to give the American people accurate information about the war and our progress from day one.

Compare to the 1990s when US forces were deployed in support of policies and goals that were not necessary for the US national interests - I was a breath of fresh air to get a President would not be bullied by our 'allies.'

Answer 4

Very responsibly. We need presence in almost every country to protect our embassies/civilians.

Very poorly. They need to start an independent outlet that is for the trrops and military that gives us an idea about what is going on all around the world. Think of how great it would be for families to be able to see where there loved ones unit is in the world.