they will want to focus more on the war in Afghanistan? We kind of abandoned that, I'd rather go after the people that actually attacked US soil. I really want to join the Army but I don't want to fight in Iraq because I don't think we belong there.
2007-10-18 13:27:44 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
im not trying to offend anyone here so no need to get negative with me. I just need to get some more info on the war in Afghanistan
2007-10-18 13:48:55 · update #1
The "forgotten war" I agree needs more attention and troop strength. When I was deployed there back in '04 my whole unit was convinced we weren't going to do anything because you NEVER heard a word about Afghanistan. All the news knows is Iraq Iraq Iraq. When we got there though it was a different story, we soon realized that Iraq wasn't the only combat zone our troops were being deployed to. I'm not saying I'm against the Iraq war, but we do need a little more focus on Afghanistan
2007-10-18 16:44:08 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Afghanistan is still an operation, but because the improvements there are so great, the liberal medias (which is almost all of them) no longer cover that area.
Insurgents in Iraq are not fighting to kick us out as much as they are because their commander told them to since they were little kids, but those commanders are members of al-Queda and other major terrorist groups that hate democracy and women's rights.
No matter where you get sent, you're fighting the same people/faction.
If we get a Democratic President such as Obama or Clinton, they'll pull our troops out of Iraq (causing one of the largest genocides in history) and probably do whatever they can to get out of Afghanistan and piss off Russia to the point of a second Cold War.
If you're wanting to be in the army, that's good, but if you want a Democrat in office, those two are bad combinations. All the "active service" you'll be seeing is a desk job, and then a beheading once terrorists infiltrate the USA.
Considering that you highly value our position in Afghanistan, you'd be best off going with Romney, assuming he's the Republican finalist. After him, Rudy would be best.
No Democrat sees this the way you do, and Al Gore is probably going to come forward and claim he invented the War on Terror once we have Osama's head on the bayonet of an M16.
It's because of a Democrat (Clinton) that our security was so weak to the point that hijacking an airliner was a relatively easy task for al-Queda.
2007-10-18 21:34:10 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
My suggestion is not to join the military at all. A solider never knows where they are going, and I do not believe we will out of Iraq anytime soon. In addition, most soldiers love some part about being a solider. They only bad part about being a solider is that you can never pick your war. You can never pick what you feel is worth fighting for and what isn't. That is the freedom of civilian life. There are many good soldiers that in Iraq that feel the US should not have invaded, and many of them have volunteered for second and third tours. It is possible that the next president will focus on Afghanistan but then again we now have Iran to worry about. Maybe if you feel Iran is a big enough threat you should join but I would not suggest it.
2007-10-18 20:44:31 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
If we get a Dem Pesident our military will be placed in the catagory of "second class citizen". The Dem's are by tradition not strong on the military or defense of our Country. Their primary concern is creating welfare programs and increasing the tax burden on the middle class, altho they will claim to place this levy on the rich...they themselves tend to avoid paying tax thru the loop holes they claim the Rep's created.
But back to your question:
If the Dem's are elected we will not only abandon Iraq but all other's that need our help so badly. We will not only abandon them, we will do so with no regard to what effect this will have on the region or world in general.
Hillary (and that unfortunerly) will be the Dem's choice, has some very bad examples which she will be following. I guess we'll be back to sex in the oval office, but this time it will be Bill taking the brunt of the jokes.
2007-10-18 21:35:08 · answer #4 · answered by topcop 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Afghanistan isn't abandoned. It just isn't as sexy as Iraq with all the made for TV explosions and all so the news doesn't focus on it.
2007-10-18 22:02:50 · answer #5 · answered by M C 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
That's not unreasonable, but no. I don't think they will.
It is a great way to get elected by claiming disaster, but if they get in office, and Iraq collapses, they are going to hate it.
That's why our present Congress hasn't been more aggressive about not being aggressive (in Iraq).
However, many people don't realize the rest of the story in Iraq.
1) They paid suicide bombers to attack civilians in Israel (one of our few allies in the Middle East).
2) They attacked another ally (Kuwait).
3) They attacked our troops repeatedly while we had a cease-fire (at their own request) for ten years.
4) They tried to assassinate our President.
5) They claimed, up to within a few months of the invasion, that they did have WMDs to their own allies. If they lied to their own allies, no wonder both Democratic and Republican leaders in President Clinton's and President Bush's cabinets believed it as well.
Is it as important as Afghanistan? No. In hind sight, it wasn't.
Now that they are desperate to destroy it and make it into a fundamentalist Islamic government it is the most important thing in the world.
If we don't help them solidify, we create our greatest enemy.
What a monument to our soldiers.
2007-10-18 20:40:46 · answer #6 · answered by mckenziecalhoun 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Then stay out of the military, you really aren't up to current events. Lesson 1 our troops are not being killed in the cross fire of a civil war, they are being targeted by foreign terrorists IED's EPD's these are not part of a civil war . The terrorists have stated over and over, bin ladin, Zawhari both have said very clearly that Iraq is the front for their jihad. With so much information at the click of a mouse how do you stay so ignorant.
2007-10-18 20:38:01 · answer #7 · answered by wiliemom 5 · 6⤊ 1⤋
Join the Army anyway. You will be fighting al qaeda in iraq too. Iraq is an international bug zapper for terrorists they come there to fight us and we kill them. The damage we are doing in iraq to al qaeda will be very hard for them to recover from not to mention we are about to destroy Iran via air bombing campaign. Most of the major work is almost done in iraq. If you join, most likely you will end up in either afghanistan or pakistan killing terrorists.
2007-10-18 20:35:35 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
The fight was in Afganistan. After we attacked Iraq the fight moved to there. Far more terrorist are moving to Iraq to fight us than where in Afganistan. Yes, we never should have attacked Iraq. Now that we are there, that is where the fight is.
2007-10-18 21:00:25 · answer #9 · answered by Chris 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
who ever is elected it will be the same. not even ran paul will bring them back. it's not that simple.
the military belongs where ever they are sent even if you don't agree with it. they don't ask your opinion you just go.
your not the military type, so you shouldn't join. you strike me as more of the type to hold a sign at a global warming rally or some other liberal cause.
2007-10-18 22:50:48 · answer #10 · answered by darrell m 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋