What is the point of fighting a war that the US can never win with only 160,000 ground troops in Iraq but could easily win with 3,000,000 US troops?
2007-09-05 09:47:52 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
That would make people who like sitting safe and cozy at home with yellow ribbons on their cars too nervous.
2007-09-05 09:53:53 · answer #1 · answered by Chi Guy 5 · 10⤊ 4⤋
Charlie Rangel's been calling for one for years.
The thing is:
A) People aren't going to support it. And by people I mean conservatives (when the reality sinks in that THEY might actually be drafted) and liberals.
B) There is no unilaterally guaranteeing a "win", as the neocons define it (eradication of all terrorists and "stabilization" of the country). No matter the size of the force, there are going to be terrorist incidents indefinitely, until the Iraqis decide they want peace. A huge amount of troops would improve security certainly, but there would still be the question of what happens when we left.
C) We are already absolutely DROWNING in debt from the war, how the hell are we going to afford keeping millions of troops over there indefinitely. May as well sign over the whole country to China.
2007-09-05 10:00:48 · answer #2 · answered by celticexpress 4 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Well it is simple...nobody wants a draft. It is a political suicide for anyone who votes for it so it will not come to pass. Then there is the prospect of having to pay for and train an additional 2.8 million young men some of whom have no business holding a weapon. The death toll would jump by leaps and bounds into the tens of thousands. Oh and to pay for it are we going to continue deficit spending or raise taxes. How much money are you willing to throw at a problem that has to be solved politically and not militarily. The Iraqi government needs to get its act together or we'll be there for decades no matter the number of troops on the ground.
2007-09-05 09:58:54 · answer #3 · answered by UriK 5 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Like the Roman Empire, the USA has lost its drive. That is common with old nations. They do not have the drive to expand, the drive to grow, they become comfortable in their old age and really do not want to put any effort into it.
Whereas the USA was more than willing to do what it took to win WW TWO, including going to a total war economy, we today are having too much fun with our football games, rock concerts, golf games and new cars.
Whereas in WW TWO we realized that men die, today we keep a close body count and think if someone dies in war, someone made a mistake, did not supply the troops with what they needed or committed a war crime.
American has turned into an old nation, not even willing to defend its own borders from a hoard of invaders from the south. Instead, both our Democrat and Republican leaders are going to surrender without a fight and form the North American Union, so those we now call illegal can go where they want, when they want as we will all be one big happy family.
The USA will disappear into this Union, giving up the rights of its citizens in order to fit in with the more repressive governments of Mexico and Canada. It will continue to decline and in 50 years, will be like England, sitting back and thinking about our youth and glory days. And we will watch as China becomes the new, number one world power.
If you kid is thinking of taking a language in high school, I recommend Chinese.
2007-09-05 09:59:45 · answer #4 · answered by forgivebutdonotforget911 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
More soldiers in the hands of incompetents only means higher casualties.
There is no guarantee that a draft would cause a win. First somebody who knows what they are doing has to be in charge that has not been the case with Bush-Cheney-Haliburton.
2007-09-05 10:07:19 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No number of soldiers on the ground can stop this "war" on terror because you can't shoot an idea or a culture. They don't want our brand of freedom and we shouldn't force feed it to anyone. We have so many problems back here at home to deal with. The half a trillion dollars spent on the "war" could definatly helped out millions of people here. Instead this war will be a burden for several generations.
2007-09-05 10:00:44 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 0⤋
The draft was in place during the vietnam war and we lost, so, because a draft is in place there is little to say we would win what is indeed a political soultion using military force as a hammer...it never works.
2007-09-05 09:56:34 · answer #7 · answered by alphabetsoup2 5 · 8⤊ 1⤋
A draft would drive Republicans into the democratic party.
2007-09-05 10:07:08 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
We should have a draft. A draft would guarantee that the Iraq war would end quickly. If you want to see the draft as having the effect of “winning” the Iraq war, then that’s okay too. General Petraeus has said, however, that the problems in Iraq don't have a military solution.
2007-09-05 10:00:55 · answer #9 · answered by tribeca_belle 7 · 2⤊ 5⤋
Ask the Russians how that worked out for them in Afghanistan, and have you overlooked, forgotten or never heard of Viet Nam?
2007-09-05 10:12:36 · answer #10 · answered by HP 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It would be extremely politically unpopular...you think people are against the war now...institute the draft and see what happens.
2007-09-05 09:57:04 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋