I'm serving my country proud and I'm being deployed to Iraq next month for my 3rd tour. Sometimes I feel if we just keep trades with other nations, yet mind our business when they have issues we wouldn't be warring nor spending so much money in aid. We have problems here as it is, no other nations come to our rescue, Shouldn't we just take care of our own? thats my opinion, I want some other insights
2007-03-06
07:44:51
·
16 answers
·
asked by
airborne11binfantry
2
in
Politics & Government
➔ Military
No one said put our head in the sand or be cowardly, I'm saying stop aiding other countries. When 9/11 happened we swiftly went to Afghanistan and toppled the Taliban and Al Queda Cells there, We should still be in The Middle East because we are actively searching for Al Queda, but we are also spending lots of money in aiding Iraq a country who really deem us an occupation and dont want us there, so we are spending money on them and they aren't grateful. Once we are out of there I believe we need to just safeguard our nation and let other countries fend for themselves like we fend for ourselves.
2007-03-06
07:55:37 ·
update #1
First off, Thank you for the job you are doing. I just finished a question this morning about wounded veterans getting the short end of the stick after conflicts are ended. Our latest wars are sparked and managed by politicians, funded by the tax payer, and ultimately paid for by the soldier. I feel that the national guard should not be in an Iraqi suberb. The name implies that they guard our nation. I don't feel that we should be changing other nations governments, I don't like our president right now but I don't want Canada to sweep down, hang him, and install a parliament. I have been alive and concious through two republican presidential regimes and both spent more time spending our money outside of our borders than inside them.
This president has spent more money and time trying to rebuild neighborhoods in Iraq, than he has in New Orleans. We watched 30,000 people be stranded for 3 days because the area did not have enough national guardsmen to mount an effective response. You are right this is just a disgrace, and our brave soldiers deserve to be treated better during and after service.
300 billion + in Iraq ~ 100 billion for the Gulf Coast
2007-03-06 08:03:14
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
America has tried to closed door policy before after the end of WW1. All that did was let other nations of the world get stronger which led to the raid at Pearl Harbour in WW2. Ever since WW2, the US has learned its lesson and has been active an active player in the world policitics. I understand where you are coming from, and you have every right wanting America to stop fighting so much in other parts of the world because you are the one laying your life on the line everytime you step on foreign soil. We thank you for the sarcifices you have made to protect our freedom. I do think America is currently fighting too many wars and is stretching its military dangerously thin, but to just completely close our doors to the outside world would be wrong as well. I think America should pick and choose its fights. Not just aim its military at any country who may have not agreed with America in the past.
2007-03-06 11:11:32
·
answer #2
·
answered by PackLover 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
I know it must not help you much when you see all these people on hear say such bad things about our military thanks to everything they see on the news. But I will say that I'm proud of all those brave men and women like yourself and thankful for all the things that you do for our safety.
Well, it's like my dad told me while he was in the Vietnam War the things he saw happen to the people around him it was hard on him but he said he knew he had a job to do and he had to keep pushing on even though the people back in the States didn't like the fact of being in a war he still kept going. And yes he was hurt even the doctor at the time told him that he would be in a wheel chair by the age 40 because he was blown back about 30 feet. He is now in his 60's and is getting ready to go over to Iraq again.
So I guess that's why I have allot of respect for those in the service because the story's my Grandfather told me about WWII and the Story's my Dad told me about the Vietnam War.
2007-03-06 12:47:57
·
answer #3
·
answered by JG78 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
First of all, THANK YOU and MAY GOD BLESS YOU for your service. To answer your question: I think we should bring all the troops back home (heck, the folks in Germany and Japan and the UK don't want us there either; they just want our money), let the troops train for their real job -- COMBAT -- take a stance of neutrality in foreign affairs unless we're attacked or innocent Americans are killed, and stop spending money on foreign aid that would be better served right here at home (rebuilding New Orleans would be a good place to start).
2007-03-06 07:52:01
·
answer #4
·
answered by sarge927 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
I feel we're way past a bit of intervention. I'm sorry we're in this war and I wish I could change it. I'd rather have you protecting and helping us here! Yes, we should take of our own. Including the veterans that return. If we just bully all our neighbors, the neighbors don't like us and we'll never have a nicer neighborhood. I want my neighborhood back, when we were a "favorite" neighbor. It was so much nicer. Best of luck to you-I hope you'll be back soon.
2007-03-06 07:58:56
·
answer #5
·
answered by Middleclassandnotquiet 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
I agree. I don't understand why America thinks it has to police the world. We have so many problems here at home that could take up the goverments time if they are bored, why not concentrate on us once in awhile? However, I believe that America is so wrapped up in foreign politics and interests already that we are forced to act like big brother all the time.
2007-03-06 07:52:04
·
answer #6
·
answered by Kelly 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
Spend less on weapons means more schools, hospitals, cleaner air and water, a cleaner planet for our grandchildren, more educated people and less crimes in the country. To avoid conflicts, the answer is not war, but taking, listening, understanding, some concessions… tolerance for those things we don't understand or appreciate… tolerance and mutual understanding. (Btw: Iraq conflict was started due to weapon of mass destruction -never found- not due to 9/11.)
2007-03-06 08:10:02
·
answer #7
·
answered by Robert W 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
We tried that in WWII. We ignored the war until it came looking for us. Eventually, we always get drawn in. The rest of the world just won't piss off. Then we come in and look like the bad guys.
I'm glad you are proud to do your duty. You should be. Every freedom we have in this country was paid for with the blood of Heroes.
I pray for your safe, victorious return. God bless you and yours.
2007-03-06 08:00:54
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Corporations use the US military to keep third-world countries in line, forcing them to work at slave labor in bad conditions for almost no money (no, it's not just the exchange rate) in order to compete for the US consumer dollar while taking hefty profits.
It is the ability to continue this exploitation and extend it to the oil-producing nations in the middle east that has you returning over and over for additional tours of 'duty' way outside any reasonable threat to the physical US or to its people residing here.
The Constitution says to guard our borders; those are physical and do not include people vacationing on cruise ships or working in foreign countries.
2007-03-06 07:52:22
·
answer #9
·
answered by nora22000 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
united states of origin...u . s . and pleased with it. :) i imagine the time period "meddling" relies upon on who defines it. it variety of appears like the international won't be able to settle on at situations even if the U.S. might want to insert their 2 cents worth or butt out. it variety of feels if we get entangled, we are a meddling superpower who might want to options that is own biz. If we stay on the sidelines, we are a egocentric superpower that would not care about something of the international. we received't win for dropping. celebration...the United international locations threw a in advantageous condition at the same time as President Clinton suggested them they were prepared to act alongside with NATO with out the UN's consent to get interested by Bosnia and later Kosovo. yet, if we hadn't stepped in we would want to were considered as egocentric, plus probable kept a higher conflict from breaking out. many human beings complained that we had no corporation getting in touch contained in the international in the course of the Clinton years. initially, at the same time as Bush took workplace, he planned to no longer have u . s . in touch all around the globe. How did the international react? Accused human beings of no longer being concerned about something of the international. After Iraq, human beings accused us of meddling until eventually France and different international locations contained in the UN requested us to intrude in Haiti and avert huge bloodshed. American Marines bypass in, get Juan Bertrand Aristide, and pull him to freedom. How are we repaid? by Aristide and the French howling about how we abducted him. If i replaced into president of u . s ....i might want to pull the U. S. out of the United international locations because the UN isn't interested in helping yet hindering u . s .. Then, i might want to pull up keep for any united states that desires no longer something to do with us. those international places might want to confirm an end to diplomatic relations, as well because the dry-up of economic help, etc. i might want to purely be serious concerning the position human beings might want to opt for us to be.
2016-10-17 10:40:57
·
answer #10
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋