The new song and dance seems to be Democrat and liberal dissent to the war in Iraq are the main causes of the problems faced by the military on the ground there.
How does this work logistically?
How does dissent at home impede the efficiency of an all-volunteer army fighting more than 15 000 kilometers away from the dissenters?
2007-07-11 23:19:46 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
The same was said about the Viet Nam war, and was used by the hawks as a justification for Kent State. While it cannot be denied that the Viet Cong derived some comfort from the division of opinion, there has never been a shred of evidence that our democratic dissent affected the conduct of the war in country.
There is a great deal of evidence, however, to suggest that the war was unwinnable to begin with, and that once the troops on the ground realized this their morale and efficiency plummeted. I suspect this is what will happen in Iraq as well.
The German commando leader Otto Skorzenay predicted in 1948 that future wars of occupation could not be won in the face of a determined opposition capable of hiding in the crowd. Without a ruthless determination to crush the jihadists the troops cannot even break even, let alone win.
The only solutions to be found in Iraq are those arrived at by the Iraqi people. We can arm and train our friends, but we cannot hold their ground for them. Freedom cannot be a gift, and the Iraqis must earn it for themselves.
2007-07-11 23:49:18 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
It's really only the past year where people have had enough. Three years was total control by republicans and we can look back at those same horrible results. I saw a show a few nights ago called Battlefield Breakdown. One part was a convoy delivering materials. The topic of the troops in the convoy? Not what party do you belong, not are you a liberal or conservative, it was what's your blood type in case of a needed transfusion. Some here at home may not be smart enough to separate support for the troops and no support for the conflict. The troops on the other hand worry about each other, not what's going on here, not the mission, they worry about the guys next to them and getting home alive.
2007-07-12 08:22:57 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Liberal dissent is actually not affecting them at all. Our troops would encounter resistance and casualties whether the liberals want to get out or not. The troops have all the funding and the manpower they need and at this point the only way it's ever goign to get any better is to start letting them handle their own security problems now with the forces we've trained for them.
2007-07-12 06:23:54 · answer #3 · answered by Medic 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Dissent didn't impede progress, lack of leadership did. Unfortunately when human beings fail they often look for an excuse to explain away their failure. For today's politicians, this means blaming the other party.
2007-07-12 08:29:07 · answer #4 · answered by BOOM 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
How does our own Generals saying the war is a failure effect the troops? Or is still JUST the liberals?
Do you just label anyone who disagrees with you about the war as a liberal? Because it's not just liberals.
2007-07-12 12:45:17 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
A critic of your logic would say that dissent about the war creates a tangible goal for an enemy, that dragging out a war can serve them better, knowing we will "pull out" and not stick to the difficult task of "staying".
2007-07-12 07:02:07 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well I'm sure the troops over there fighting and risking there lives love hearing all the liberals say how this war is a waste of time and stupid and unjust. That makes them feel real good I bet that they are putting their lives on the line for people who don't seem to give a damn about them. So there is one way it is bad, troop morale.
2007-07-12 06:46:31 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Um, you're a traitor? No, wait, surrender-monkey! Freedom fries! 9/11 changed everything!
2007-07-12 09:11:36 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Why should it? It's called FREE SPEECH. It's a RIGHT we ALL have here. All democrats?? Maybe you should watch the news a little more closely.
2007-07-12 06:23:56 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Hilarious. Just plain hilarious. You guys messed up and somehow free speech is to blame. Again, hilarious.
2007-07-12 06:32:22 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋