ha ha ha less mouths to feed, sorry about this rude comment, you see, i want peace for all people and no more violence first ...........but i do see that courage is alive and well in america and i must salute that........and be strong but fair and remember the power of the spoken word and how it can hurt each other.........patience should be the new word for the future and take the time to clean up the residue from all of the actions of the last years and have we done enough things right? i hope i can also do more to help and not be a negative person in the world and work for the common good........lets all pray for a better tomorrow and mean it ......one and all bye
2007-11-08 17:58:02
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It stressed tested the military. This popped up that the military didn't expect, while other things worked like they should.
It separated the triad of Syria, Iraq and Iran which were all helping terrorists in Lebanon and around Israel. Now Iran is surrounded on three sides (the Gulf, Iraq and Afganistan) by U.S. troops which would eventually cut them off from supplying terrorists with arms and cash.
It caused terrorists to attack U.S. troops in Iraq and they are now dead, captured and now too few to make a big impact. Money that went to Al Qaida is drying up as it's been used and the suppliers have been caught.
It has prevented a ressession. Somebody has to design and make all that equipment. That extra $100 billion a year doesn't vanish. It goes in the pockets of the troops and suppliers. For instance money went to GM workers, which are making the humvees.
A stable Iraq would make it harder for Iran and Syria to keep their citizens since they could just move to Iraq.
2007-11-09 16:10:03
·
answer #2
·
answered by gregory_dittman 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
To America....that's a definate yes, but to the American people, I'd see your point with the question. This isn't WW2, there is'nt this country wide war effort or rationing like back then.
Since only 2% of the country has anything to do with the war or someone in the war, I'd say we should stiffle the day to day, blow by blow news because in the process of "informing" everyone, people will form their own opinions on it, and the really whack jobs will start protesting, whining about it, and make all the usual false claims and slogans.
There aren't many civilians in the chain of command when it comes to such thing and that is good, because its what the military does, leave them the hell alone to do their job. They don't care about your opinion really, especially when its an adversarial one, because the military isn't a democracy. They don't have the right to say no. That is where the Vietnam peace movement went wrong. If they cared one bit about the troops they would have attacked the Government that sent them there, which they tried through protest, but those same supposed saintly, peace minded idiots turned on our troops when they returned...calling them baby killers and spitting on them. Meanwhile the 60's generation loser that supported that movement...which actually turned out to be a death movement for many left behind...over a million killed and put in prison camps......they sit back smuggly thinking they actually did something good. now here they are again, twisting people's ideology and views with their sick version of it based on what they did long ago.
I'm not suggesting radio silence, but I'd scale back the information to an end of week progress report or a monthly. Too many people like sticking their nose in where it doesn't belong, too many people 2nd guessing Mr. Bush when they haven't even seen 1/2 the information that he has when the war was started. The libs give their own people a free pass on voting for it or who have made statements as to why we need to do this.
Sure, its been messier and longer than we all wanted, but do you want to be shook with bombs every week like Israel was years ago ? Radical muslims have been messing with this country or its delegates since the 1700's, and we haven't done much to invite it. We've been pretty darn patient to respond as well. Once in a while you need to smack the bully on the block in the nose just to let him know that he isn't all that tough. Alot of you....especially on the left seem to have forgotten what patriotism is and how great the country has been.
I don't see you out there decrying how Jimmy Carter created the terror spreading Iran. Or running to the UN and wanting justice for the many terrorist acts that have killed many all over the world including countries with no affiliation with the UK, USA or supposed "great white satans".
We have the power to turn their entire country into a glass parking lot, but we don't, because we cherish life that much. We have historically gone into countries to remove the bad leadership just to hand the country back to the people and aid them in rebuilding it. That noble cause is expensive. Perhaps we should debate as to if we shold doing it anymore , that's for the future, But we believe in freedom, and not only within our own borders.
2007-11-09 01:45:49
·
answer #3
·
answered by Nightwind 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
Yes, very helpful if you own stock in industries that produce war materials or oil or provide security services.
The sick system desperately needs an overhaul.
2007-11-09 01:52:24
·
answer #4
·
answered by jaicee 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Overall, yes. If Iraq stabilizes (which it is), the hardliner Islamicists (who are the real enemies of the US, Europe, China, and the rest of the world) will have a much harder time getting things done. They already have a much harder time getting things done, since we're killing them in large numbers.
2007-11-09 01:34:58
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
you know ive seen the things you have wrote on here and i dont understand how u can say the things you do on here and i have a really good awnser for you if you dont stand behind me your more than welcome to stand infront of me!!!
PFC. Cooley
223rd mp co
U.S.ARMY
2007-11-09 01:51:55
·
answer #6
·
answered by mike16903 1
·
1⤊
1⤋
only to George since he could not find osama........the invasion got him re elected(we historically don't change leaders during a war.............)
2007-11-09 01:22:47
·
answer #7
·
answered by richard t 7
·
2⤊
2⤋