It may be best if politicians ask them.
2007-07-10 08:04:56 · 13 answers · asked by woody 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
It seems that the people doing the job should be the ones to say the job is done
2007-07-10 08:08:21 · answer #1 · answered by The Forgotten 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I seriously doubt you would ask that question if you had ever been in the military. As a former soldier I need to tell you we take great pride in our job. To suggest that we would ever want to leave until the job is completely done is tantamount to suggesting we surrender. It's something soldiers just don't do.
Besides, how would the military decide when we leave anyways, by asking the ranking officer? We already do that, he's called the Commander in Chief. You call him the President.
Would you put it to a vote? Me and most of the soldiers I worked with think we should stay until the country is stabalized. After all, for better or worse we started this and it goes against our nature to leave a job undone. However, the military is not a democracy, if it was nothing would ever get done.
Finally, you REALLY don't want a military that decides when to wage wars and when to retreat. Imagine waking up one morning to find the armed forces invaded another country despite the orders of the president and congress. For all intents and purposes the country would no longer be a democracy but a military state run by the highest ranking generals.
The military is the strongest power exercised by the government. To deny the government control of that power would be to neuter its ability to act or speak with any authority on the international scene.
So thank God you live in a country where the military doesn't have that kind of power.
2007-07-10 15:30:47 · answer #2 · answered by myke2010 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely not. When you let the military start deciding policy many more problems can develop. Who would stop them from declaring martial law and putting all of America under military rule. You can't just say we want you to make this one decision without giving them extensive powers that could easily be abused. And politicians have asked them. Bush is too stubborn to listen. More and more Generals are recommending pulling out as the situation has deteriorated into one in which the military is not the best option available. Keep in mind the word I just used; "option". Meaning we have other problem solving methods. So pulling the military out is not equal to giving up on Iraq. It just means we need to put the hammer back in the toolbox and grab a screwdriver.
2007-07-10 15:19:41 · answer #3 · answered by David M 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I support staying in Iraq. I also think that some deference should be given to the commanders waging this war. That said, it has never been the case that the military decides policy. The military can decide on certain strategies, but the policies are implemented by the executive branch, as it pertains to actual war.
Thus, the military cannot decide to pull out of Iraq. Only the president can decide that.
The strategies and tactics within the overall policy are within the realm of the commanders, but the overall direction is done by the executive branch.
Thus, when MacArthur wanted to invade China, Truman stopped him.
Still, I support staying in Iraq and I do think the military ought to be given the benefit of the doubt. But, it is still up to the president and it has never been the case that matters as important as this were left entirely to the military, whether it was Madison and the War of 1812 or Lincoln dismissing McClellan, putting in U.S. Grant.
2007-07-10 15:19:21 · answer #4 · answered by nyc_1oo14 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely!
Once the Congress (not the president alone) decides to go to war, the military should be free to execute it's war plans in what ever fashion it needs to win the war.
Unfortunately, in the case of Iraq (and Vietnam), the military was asked to fight a war, without free reign to execute it with full force. The free love hippies, now the PC liberals, are forcing the military to fight, in John Kerry's words, 'a kinder, gentler war.' What the heck is that!?!?!?
War should be avoided, but when necessary, we need to release all our power to win the war.
There is no enemy that can withstand the full force of the US military!
2007-07-10 15:16:05 · answer #5 · answered by KAVE 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not exactly. The military should decide how to accomplish the objectives given to them. Ideally, Congress should declare war, and the Military (including the Comander in Chief) should decide how to defeat the enemy, and that should be the end of it.
2007-07-10 15:08:46 · answer #6 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Politicians do ask them.
And every military commander who has suggested leaving has been removed from his position. Check the records.
Bush only listens to advice that matches the conclusions he has already formed.
2007-07-10 15:10:02 · answer #7 · answered by coragryph 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
A politician is commander-in-chief of the armed forces.
2007-07-10 15:18:48 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The military in our United States come under civilian authority. As such the President is at the top, he or she is elected by the citizens. So it is the citizens, through elected representives, have they say so.
2007-07-10 15:27:40 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Good grief, no.
Military leaders LOVE war......
Didn't you read Patton's book - or others about war.
If the military leaders had their way, there would be a war going on somewhere all the time.
2007-07-10 16:07:44 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋