Strange when there are protests against the war in Iraq &
Afghanistan nobody mentions Kosovo. Why are we still there?
2007-03-23 04:26:09 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I know we have ttroops all over the world.
I just wanted to point out the hypocrisy of the left. They also want the U.S. to get involved in Darfur. In other word Kosovo
good Iraq bad.
2007-03-23 05:36:35 · update #1
Because that is another one of Bill Clinton's failures. It would not look good for Hillary if the media reminded the public of this during her campaign.
2007-03-23 04:30:10 · answer #1 · answered by taxidriver 4 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Wildman ... Well, did you know the U.S. still has:
• 97,000 troops in Europe more than 60 years after the conclusion of World War II
• 30,000 troops in South Korea more than 50 years after that conflict was suspended
• 34,000 service members stationed in Japan since that war ended in 1945
• 126,000 personnel aboard U.S. military vessels patrolling the seas of the world
If you were surprised about our continued involvement in Kosovo, then I suspected you (or others) might not know about the above long-term deployments, too.
Oh, and for those who may think these are made-up figures, I refer you to my link, below, which is part of a Defense Department activity ... notice the Washington Headquarters Services (WHS) part of the URL which is in the .mil domain, as you can see.
By providing this info, I do not mean to reflect any opposition to these deployments, by the way. This is meant to help show what it has taken to maintain stability near some of these far-away places and show that peace doesn't magically happen by eliminating our presence or by having isolationist policies.
2007-03-23 11:40:39 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Anyone who graduated from high school should know that we have troops in many many places all over the world, fro Kosovo to Korea, Vietnam, everywhere. This is why we needed this troop surge becasue we dont have enough in Iraq. Anyone who doesnt knwo we have permanent bases all over the world are misinformed and thats why they are complaining about us making permanent bases in Iraq.
2007-03-23 11:38:39 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Just patrolling and cleaning up. A couple of my friends went there and all they did is stand guard, Kind of ridiculous that no one remembers how thin we spread because we are in places in the world where troops aren't dying
2007-03-23 11:30:42 · answer #4 · answered by ssgtballard 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes. As to why.. we need to have a finger on the pulse of events. One never knows what might come out of any particular place. I don't feel it strange at all. I feel ignorance of the population in general is to its peril to ignore these facts.
2007-03-23 12:25:36 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
NATO peace keeping, still and probably for many years to come.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-03-14-kosovo_N.htm?csp=34
.
2007-03-23 11:32:06 · answer #6 · answered by Icteridae 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Afghanistan, Iraq. Japan. Kuwait. Germany. UK. Diego Garcia....need I go on....
2007-03-23 11:28:42 · answer #7 · answered by Ya-sai 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Because only the US military has the capability of preventing another genocide. It's the damn liberals that want something done in Dar fur and any other place where they are killing each other. You can not put war and cancer in the same box.
2007-03-23 11:42:42 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Yes. Clinton put them there. We were there to stop "Ethnic Clensing" of the muslims.
But, you won't see that mentioned. All you see is muzzies crying because we want to wipe out Islam - which is horse defication.
2007-03-23 11:31:01 · answer #9 · answered by El Gato Volador 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Didn't Clinton say they'd be out by Christmas... of 1999? What happened?
2007-03-23 11:36:44 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋