Whenever our troops move about in Iraq, they do so in convoys along predictable roadways.
Since we don't have enough troops to watch these roads continuously, the bombs get planted along the way and it is only a matter of time before our troops will pass by.
These roads are just like the LINEAR TRACKS of a SHOOTING GALLERY that convey the designated targets back and forth until safety is reached at either end of the trip.
It is so sad to see our troops having to suffer the same fate as that of a shooting gallery target that travels back and forth along a specific linear path.
There is something so patently absurd and unfair about this scenario.
2007-05-18
21:20:38
·
8 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Military
Are you trying to say that 15 American lumberjacks are killed every day in the American lumber industry?!!!
When it comes to American deaths in Iraq, we must not overlook the number of injured soldiers as well !!
These deaths represent just the tip of the ice berg!
And these injuries are often times so severe that physical and mental functions are permanently lost.
Many of those injured, would not have survived these injuries had it not been for the state-of-the-art medical attention they received so close to the battle field.
These survivors are often permanently impaired for the rest of their lives.
And the National Guard troops in Iraq have left their usual civilian jobs to make LESS money than what they would be making at home. Some of them are losing their businesses and suffering serious economic setbacks as a result of this long-term deployment.
Your comparison to the U.S. lumber industry loses its merit and relevance in light of the whole picture !
2007-05-19
00:40:51 ·
update #1
Journalists have no reason to exaggerate the extreme dangers in Iraq! If you will check the figures of journalists that have been killed during this 4-year occupation of Iraq, you will soon see that they have suffered the highest number of deaths ever for journalists covering a war.
As for the statistics dealing with the anticipated mortality rate associated with different occupations, the people going into those occupations are fully aware of the risks they are going to encounter in those occupations.
I used to work in the canneries in Kodiak, Alaska and there is nothing more dangerous than the fishing industry in the Bering Sea. The crab fishing is the most dangerous of all and the people who go out in those crabbers in the middle of winter, know full well what their chances of survival are.
People who are serving in the National Guard know full well the terms of their service and in what context and for what duration their services are potentially going to be asked for.
2007-05-19
15:33:32 ·
update #2
The problem lies with our government significantly changing the terms of their service after the fact.
Regular career military personnel don't have the right to pick and choose what war or armed conflict they want to participate in.
When they are told to deploy somewhere, they must follow orders!
But they should reasonably expect for there to be a responsible civilian government in place that looks out for their best interests and would not deploy them so wrecklessly and with so little thought as if they were toy figures on a game board or cartoon figures in a video game!
Military service is not an industry like coal mining, deep sea fishing, iron working, ship building, or even lumberjacking.
I can't think of a more respectable career than that of a law enforcement officer.
I can't think of a more successful career than that of a law enforcement officer who has completed a 30-year career in law enforcement WITHOUT EVER HAVING TO DRAW HIS OR HER WEAPON EVEN ONCE !!!
2007-05-19
16:08:15 ·
update #3
The institutional DETERRENCE embodied in a well-trained and sufficiently large professional law enforcement agency, is a comfortable reassurance for any community to value and cherish.
The least shots fired, the better.
The lesser the number of instances that force needs to be exerted, the more successful the strategy and objective of DETERRENCE have been.
This objective holds just as true with our military.
A career military person who retires after 30 years of service without seeing any "action", is just as much a success as a military person who retires after 30 years of military service where they have engaged the enemy in combat.
Simply the luck of the draw.
It is imperative that we keep our powder dry and our military personnel and equipment in top condition and ready to deploy in those instances that diplomacy fails to work.
People who enlist in the military during peacetime, have a right to expect no less than this high standard of institutional restraint.
2007-05-19
16:45:58 ·
update #4
If we don't treat our military personnel with the utmost respect by exercising prudent restraint in putting them in harm's way, the national pool of recruits will dry up overnight.
This is something I can't emphasize enough.
This is something that all voters should have uppermost in their minds when they scrutinize candidates for political office.
2007-05-19
17:41:56 ·
update #5