2007-03-25 15:19:47 · 14 answers · asked by sgtsidewinder 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Good point! Like Bush who went awol from his national guard unit, they are gung ho at somebody else going to fight but cowards to do it themselves.
2007-03-25 15:27:06 · answer #1 · answered by Michael da Man 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Most people in any given group have never seen combat.
Way less than 1% of Americans have seen combat.
Most people who have seen combat are not experts on war.
They are experienced combatants.
That does not make them experts on war.
Relax!
2007-03-25 15:32:50 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, since I don't personally know any of these people I can't possibly know who has and who hasn't. This is known in logic as a false argument. Instead of pointing out what is wrong with what they say you are talking about some defect in the person themselves and avoiding the issue of the idea they've expressed. I guess it's effective since so many seem to think this is a clever argument. If there's some flaw in their logic point it out. But "you're momma" is not a point.
2007-03-25 15:59:43 · answer #3 · answered by Roadkill 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Some of them are the supporters of the troops, and study up on war to be as close as they can be to our soldier's, because some of us cannot fight like they do, even if they tried. The rest just see death, and don't realize it is a chosen decision on the part of our soldier's to join the military. Our Troops know some people can't join with them in combat. That is the purpose that they fight, for those who can't, and yes, also for those who won't. Bless them all, they have more guts, and strength than most. If not for them, America is dead.
2007-03-25 15:28:01 · answer #4 · answered by xenypoo 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I have, but I am hardly an expert. I do find it interesting though that the only member of Bush's cabinet who had combat experience was against invading Iraq and urged diplomacy and caution. He was right and then he was fired. I agree with you, there are an awful lot of chicken hawks out there.
2007-03-25 15:32:47 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
So true, so true. I have done my time in these wars. I was combat search and rescue for OEF, and did 2 tours in Iraq for OIF. Some don't have godamn clue as to what is going on on the ground over there.
2007-03-25 15:24:52 · answer #6 · answered by J S 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
That's true.
But it's also a matter of whether you are talking tactics, strategy, or politics. The politics of war have nothing to do with combat experience. Just like knowledge of politics is meaningless on the ground when you are being shot at.
2007-03-25 15:23:43 · answer #7 · answered by coragryph 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Thanks for saying most.
What does seeing combat have to do with politics? The current VP has never seen combat although he was invited five times. He talks a tough game yet squirms at the thought of his own blood.
How many posters have laid out tactical evaluations of securing a perimeter? I only see people saying the Iraq war as a whole is either a good thing or a bad thing.
2007-03-25 15:24:11 · answer #8 · answered by Chi Guy 5 · 4⤊ 4⤋
That may be true in some cases, but not all.
I am no expert, but I truly believe the only way the American soldier can lose is if the American people quit.
2007-03-25 15:25:27 · answer #9 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
I did in 1991, so I speak from experience.
2007-03-25 15:26:26 · answer #10 · answered by Villain 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I don't think George W. Bush and Dick Cheney post in this forum.
2007-03-25 15:28:10 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋