2007-08-22 15:38:31 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
A lot! Whats the point of fighting a war if in the end, your going to chicken out to people who invade OUR country and kill hundreds of thousands of people. We should never back out. These colors never fade!
2007-08-22 15:42:17 · answer #1 · answered by hotmama42206 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
The damage to the country's prestige and reputation would be worse than the damage to the military. The military is being damaged by not being pulled out. According to that flaming liberal Bush appointee Army CoS Gen Casey - the military will be at its breaking point by April 2008. We will have to shorten the rest period, lengthen the combat tour, or reduce the number of troops deployed.This is just math - it is not politics. We should have increased the size of the military beginning 9/12, but Rumsfeld thought he could do everything on the cheap.
We need more people in uniform.
semper fi
2007-08-22 16:21:25 · answer #2 · answered by faceman888 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No damage done. We are still a military to be reckoned with. The real question is what kind of damage will it do to the political side.
I see it happening: The people are getting tired of getting involved in wars that 1) We never finish i.e. Korea, Viet-Nam, the Gulf War etc. or 2) Wars that are impossible to win. You are seeing it now. Those days are going to come to an end. The President, Congress, Senate, etc. work for us. If they aren't doing the job we want them to do, and not listening to the people, then they need to be fired. Unfortunately, me included, don't have the smarts or the backing to get a real "for America type grassroots" program going.
Our military is strong, well equiped and trained. We have very intelligent and competent military leaders.
2007-08-22 15:49:25 · answer #3 · answered by RUESTER 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
thinking Saddam ought to no longer administration the borders of Iraq with a million squaddies how ought to the human beings with 0.5 that quantity. comparable bunch have been sneaking weapons for the time of then as now, in basic terms distinction we hear of their assaults now. ok most of the weapons have been been delivered in by using the CIA and Mossad for use on the Iraqi human beings. I do bear in mind some explosions suggested in Baghdad in the past the conflict concentrated at civilians only weren't on Fox information are any information enterprise truly. Who cared in any respect that some Sunni's have been been killed till some human beings have been on the floor caught up interior the mess.
2016-12-12 10:00:48 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No damage would be done, we would have damage to our country, and our ability to defend ourselfs from the rest of the world. Everyone else would start to think that they have balls and that they could take on America because we don't have the courage to stand up for what is right or to stand up and defend outselfs, if we back down now we will end up looking like France.
2007-08-22 15:44:13 · answer #5 · answered by jslewis81 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Terms like "win" and "lose," in this situation, don't help clarify our position at all. We have no "battle" to win in Iraq; we're instead policing a messy insurgency, and the people increasingly want us out.
If you haven't read it, yet, I STRONGLY recommend a two page article from the NYTimes, written by soldiers finishing out their 15 months in Iraq. Here's the link:
2007-08-22 15:43:16 · answer #6 · answered by Vaughn 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Think of every kidnapping, murder, terrorist attack since the end of Vietnam and multiply by 3.
2007-08-22 17:30:58 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think our troops should mutiny and walk away from Iraq. Can they court-martial 40,000 people?
2007-08-22 15:54:18 · answer #8 · answered by paris 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋
They would be considered embarrassing
2007-08-22 18:43:58 · answer #9 · answered by brainstorm 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋