Is Bush the new Lyndon B. Johnson?
2007-05-28 11:59:27 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in News & Events ➔ Current Events
Uh, Trashy, I am a Veteran! Guess you don't read profiles!
2007-05-29 12:50:47 · update #1
"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on."
- Sir Winston Churchill
2007-05-28 12:13:54 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think the problem in Iraq is one of logistics. You see, no matter how well armed an army can be, it is irrelevant on the ground! You can win the war, but loose the Peace! And the reason why is obvious, army's are trained to attack and overwhelm the enemy, but they are not policeman! Throughout history it has been proved time and time again, that you can subdue an enemy but you cannot bring peace to a country until you start policing it! Can you imagine the L.A.P.D. riding down main street in a Abraham tank with an officer hanging out the turret with a M50 machine gun! Ludicrous! Abraham's just don't seem to catch getaway vehicles! So you can see that the army haven't got the right sort of equipment to police a country like Iraq. Have a good day.
2007-05-29 00:36:01 · answer #2 · answered by wheeliebin 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
There is no comparison, This is an all volunteer military. There is no draft, no pulling students out of college, and I have not seen anyone spit in the face of any returning soldiers. I am a hard core combat Viet-Nam veteran, and I cringe when folks make this comparison. What people fail to understand, is the military. By not supporting our fighters, your advocating separation between politics and the military's job. If you look at our society then, and along with the hippy movement, sabotaging the military, with their philosophy and their contribution in dividing this country. If and when this war is over, as bloody and harsh as it is, and until then, our boys need support no matter what..."FREEDOM DOES NOT COME CHEAP"!...... It will never be, "The New Viet-Nam"!
2007-05-28 19:57:19 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
No.
Viet Nam was not a strategic location in the world.
It was just an easy country, we thought, to invade.
Iraq, IS a strategic location in the world. It separates Iran and Israel.
It was an easy country, we thought, to invade.
We can't leave, or the Middle-east will erupt with turmoil.
2007-05-28 19:23:25 · answer #4 · answered by Anonnnn24424 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
YES !!! Everyone says lets get out, but the politicians all say we should get out, but never seem to get the votes to do that. Its all about who's going to take care of me, when i vote. If all about blood money.
2007-05-28 19:11:44 · answer #5 · answered by grinny 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I thought it already was, cos I got raspberried the last time I said I thought so.
2007-05-29 16:11:55 · answer #6 · answered by Hot Coco Puff 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
U betcha...From wet 2 dry.
2007-05-28 19:07:09 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I was not in vietnam and do not know. its funny how most of the people who say this is happening are not even vets.
2007-05-28 19:07:04 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
You're just now noticing?
2007-05-28 19:04:40 · answer #9 · answered by Count Floyd 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
some of us told you so years ago.
2007-05-28 21:17:25 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋