A great Calvin & Hobbes comic (as usual) for all of you.
http://www.marcellosendos.ch/comics/ch/1991/02/19910218.gif
-gizmod brian
http://nachofoto.com
2007-08-27 17:47:47 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
They don't solve many problems, they aide in helping the people solve their problems....read on.
They physically stop and repel enemy aggressors from moving in on an objective and acquiring ground and power. From there, the soldier occupies the territory, brings peace and order, and allows the politicians to resolve any social and governing issues. The politicians being "The People" of that land, or otherwise.
The Politician is usually the problem inserted into this scene, which screws everything up. Hence, "Support the Troops" is yelled from every rooftop and not "Support the Politicians". This does make the soldiers' job more difficult. Without people's support, then they lose theirs shortly after. If a GOOD leader can stand up and bring the people together, resolve issues and make their country better for it, then the soldier's effort and life can be well worth the battle.
2007-08-27 18:02:48 · answer #1 · answered by Christopher 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You have to understand, the military is ultimately to carry out the President's wishes. Although they may not agree with this war (and I assure you, a vast number don't), they have vowed to protect the country and SERVE THE PRESIDENT. Now, on killing people. This is a geurilla war. The soldiers aren't trying to kill people to solve the world's problems. The way you put it was incredibly blunt and reckless. They are trying to establish a democracy that isn't effective in the country because there is no social consensus. But the natives are just as guilty of killing people as we are. It doesn't really solve conflict but it protects the soldiers at hand.
2016-05-19 22:39:26 · answer #2 · answered by adelia 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They show the human cost of disagreement. One side thinks it's too much, they'll change to what the other side wants. That's why Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings brought surrender. That's why the US pulled out of Vietnam. That's why the English pulled out of the 13 American colonies. Human cost was too much to support the idea.
2007-08-27 17:53:04 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Soldiers of the U.S. take an oath to uphold the constitution from both domestic and foreign terrorists. It may not solve the world's problem but it certainly protect's our rights to freedom, which I certainly don't oppose!
2007-08-27 17:59:45 · answer #4 · answered by Glen B 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They don't.Their injuries and deaths create huge problems for themselves and their loved ones. But war involvement solves all kinds of problems for the huge military-industrial complex that supports the war, because it provides financial solutions. Political boosters, stock owners, and owners/managers can retire early, smiling, and filthy rich. And as the bodies are carried off,somehow get themselves to believe that they have done no wrong.
2007-08-27 18:13:41 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
That is a great point. It solves NOTHING! I see no point in killing people we don't even know. I see no point in war anyway.
-K.Punk
p.s. great comic
2007-08-27 18:00:15 · answer #6 · answered by K.Punk 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
And Calvin does, right? Try using something other then a comic book character to back you up.
2007-08-27 17:50:58 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋
lol, that cartoon is right on the money. The only real way to get peace is by leaving people alone and minding your own business. If someone attacks you, you go after them. Dont Invade Iraq like bush did. Osama ain't in Iraq.
2007-08-27 17:52:26 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 4⤋
Good question I'm someone asked that around 3,000 years ago and got this very same answer.
"It just does"
2007-08-27 17:53:52 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
A good cartoon. No good answers yet.
2007-08-27 17:52:04 · answer #10 · answered by smsmith500 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋