Were gonna need 600,000 troops to finish the job in Iraq! Time to draft everyone! Equal and fair- Everyone goes! Rich or poor...One Hundred and twenty degrees in the shade, free nice clean Haliburton drinking-water trucks, yippee!
Lock and Load Lets Go!!
Men, Women and Children - Ok under 12 can stay home for a while yet...
Bush senior took 600,000 to Kuwait- that worked- fast and efficient - why is the current struggle so under staffed?
at least we marked off the 4 year anniversary of ending military operations in Iraq! YAY! Hurray!!
Now, C'mon - lets go wipe out the ever increasing insurgency - - will you ride along with me? (you might get killed- but it's WORTH IT!!)
After all, Jesus let himself get killed too!
2007-05-02 06:36:06 · 16 answers · asked by omnimog 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
We no longer HAVE 600,000 troops -
we coulda done this right from the beginning -
2007-05-02 06:51:47 · update #1
How 'bout this, what was the job again? Let's see, this war was never legally declared by congress. We were told that there were WMD's and Al-CIAeda links. No WMD's, if any they used them on Iran in the 80's(not to forget we gave them those), and there were no terrorists there, since Hussein(yes an evil dictator) hated them and killed them. Then we're lied once again, to help them create democracy(mob rule). Let's see here, there's like a million dead Iraqi's, 3000+ US soldiers killed, and I have to pay $3.44 a gallon at the pumps. Wow liberation must feel good to the innocent civilians of Iraq.
2007-05-02 06:59:00 · answer #1 · answered by Ted S 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
That is totally unfair, I am 59 years old and I want to go
but I am no longer a very good shot because my eye sight
has deteriorated, so I guess I will just have to shoot the
liberal democrats and the radical Muslims because
from the way you guys talk there is NO difference except
where you happen to be at the moment.
I made it through Vietnam (LBJ's war) and will make it
through this one, hmm that is funny we had one President
named L BJ and one President getting a BJ.
Why doesn't the LIBERAL Democrats realize that their
party voted for the war too, oh yeah they only voted for
it because Bush Lied. They voted for it because they
believed it, they issued several statements that Saddam
had WMDs and they voted for it because they didn't want
to lose any votes to the Republicans.
"I voted for the war before I voted against it" --- John Kerry
2007-05-02 07:10:37 · answer #2 · answered by justgetitright 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
If only they were taking people as old as 50 - and fighting to win...
"Bush senior took 600,000 to Kuwait- that worked- fast and efficient - why is the current struggle so under staffed?"
Bush senior didn't have to institute the Draft, either, and the US hadn't even been attacked. Why would the military be understaffed? Hmm... the words 'peace dividend' seem to come to mind...
2007-05-02 06:45:17 · answer #3 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
You are so right!
unfortunately clinton did whatever he could to demoralize our troops, taking away health care for military defendants, forcing out men before they could earn full retirement, cutting into the available funds for welfare these are some of the things I remember going on when I was deciding to get out.
How about we pull troops out of Germany, Italy & Japan or do these countries deserve 60+ years of our time whereas the middle east deserves 4 years?
Maybe these cowardly liberals would just prefer to duke this one out here in the midwest instead. Only I kinda hope it is in liberal hotbeds instead so they can see it up close & personal.
battleground berkley anyone?
2007-05-02 07:07:55 · answer #4 · answered by robyn o 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
war is bad-I stand with america and ready to fight-anerica has many that just want to forget 9/11 and think the Muslim terroists are our friends-give them Iraq they will be happy-but letting others kill you and yours is worse
Jesus did it for us to believe "I go to the cross for the joy set before me."John 3 I repented of my sins-even one lie and got born again, letting Jesus into my heart to become my best friend=Revelation 3:19&20 the only hope to change terrorism-and now there is freedom under the weak government there to share the gospel and prayer.
You picked a best answer before in your questions about putting the money into homeland security and leaving as losers in Iraq so the terrorists you take sides with can take over and have billions to run their organization
=No way. Homeland security is a joke. Eliminate homeland security, beef up national guard, and coast guard, take FEMA out of government control and give that control to private sector, and you might be getting somewhere.
A Balrog of Morgoth
0
Yes, we are still open for attack here.
If we spent your billions, we'd still be open for attack here.
The way to fight terrorism is to disupt them before they can commence operations against U.S. civilian target, and simply playing defense doesn't get that done.
2007-05-02 07:09:46 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
So, what are you saying? I can't go because I'm too old? The heck with that, sign me up. I want to go do what's got to be done. I also want to go to make sure you're the point guy in the charge. When I was a Squad Leader in Vietnam, I always made sure I had the right guy on pint so I want to make sure that's you. Don't forget your body armor, and your toilet paper.
2007-05-02 07:02:35 · answer #6 · answered by libstalker 4 · 4⤊ 0⤋
You are correct on the number of soldiers required to finish the job in Iraq. But that is only the start. Are you willing to go door to door in Iraq and kill entire families for having weapons or explosives in their homes? That's how Saddam maintained control.
You will NEVER see the draft in the US unless we are attacked by CHINA.
2007-05-02 07:02:26 · answer #7 · answered by bukroo_banzai 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
In the beginning we only had Saddam to contend with. His followers didn't want to follow him. Now we are trying to battle the insane. That has proven to be a difficult task. Hard to frighten a person who gets extra credit if they die.
2007-05-02 07:03:29 · answer #8 · answered by Kenny Ray 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I come from a family with a very long, proud tradition with the American military. No problem.
Have gun - will travel.
2007-05-02 07:20:08 · answer #9 · answered by Jadis 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Total number of U.S. military personnel who served in Vietnam was 2,709,965. The most at any given time was 536,100 in December 1968. 47,378 battle casualties.
I think I'll stay home.
2007-05-02 06:54:59 · answer #10 · answered by Global warming ain't cool 6 · 0⤊ 3⤋