English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

In Bush's own words (or perhaps the words of his speach writers), the war against terrorism is really a war of "Hearts & Minds".

The way the Iraq war is being conducted (by the generals) is actually playing into the hands of the Islamic fundamentalists.

We are using White Phosphorous "Whisky Pete" because it makes the Army generals job easier, but it tarnishes our image in the eyes of the world.

We are repeating the same political & moral mistakes we made in Vietnam....

We are sophisticated enough to fight the insurgents by not having to inflict indiscriminate mass incineration on Iraqi civilians,...we are trusting our generals too much, and they are letting us down.

In this video, it shows testimony from former US Marines, and a British member of Parliment (22:15), that we are using methods outside of the Geneva Convention.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3826487796319021454

Question:

How can we make our generals do their job in ways that are less convenient for them, but still preserve our moral standing?

2007-11-10 12:01:47 · 14 answers · asked by American Dreamer 1 in Politics & Government Military

14 answers

As a fighting force we are second to none. As an occupying force we suck. Generals have to answer to Washington and be politically correct. History says if you want to win a war you have to kill your enemy and continue doing so until they give up. We have lost the desire to do that. Vietnam and now Iraq proves this. We have no business going to war if we can't finish the job.

2007-11-10 12:19:42 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

Some people dream the world will be a better place, that enemies are willing to talk out their differences.

Others know and understand the realities of the world. White phosporous has a role in warfare though it has been disallowed for use by English and American forces, despite it's allowance for use under the Geneva Convention and despite the fact that we are fighting unlawful combatants that murder unarmed women and children.

Frankly, I don't put much credence in the words of phony soldiers claiming veteran status nor the politicians that use that false testimony for political gain while stirring up dissent against our Soldiers.

The fact is that the US and Brits are abiding by the Geneva Convention and the enemy is not. Our generals are not infallable but they make fewer mistakes than most other generals. We learn from those mistakes, particularly when they are costly. War is not pretty and mistakes are extemely costly. Then again, I would bet you are not without mistakes in your profession either. We are better at our jobs because the stakes are higher and we take it more seriously.

Throw a stone! Tell me how many mistakes you made last week, last month, last year. What was the consequence? I doubt someone died because of it. In military life someone does. STFU and let us do our job.

2007-11-10 12:21:22 · answer #2 · answered by John T 6 · 6 0

Yea right..... Exactly which propaganda agency are you working for? And what qualifies you as an expert on any thing that has to do with war strategy?...And what makes you think that I care what bed wetting liberals in the world think of this country? I've always assumed that they don't hate this country any more or less than home the home grown Leftist that are constantly trashing this country and trying to surrender and lose this war.. What I don't understand is why they hate this country that they would sell out friends family or anyone else to tear it down even more.

2007-11-10 12:32:01 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

I am more concerned about the incompentents in congress than I am on the battle field. They set the Rules of Engagement for the generals.
WP is a great way to destroy a large arms cache. Trust the generals not the congressmen and women

2007-11-10 12:57:32 · answer #4 · answered by auhunter04 4 · 2 0

a few Questions for you: Are you in the military? Are you there to know what is taking place? Apparently, you, like many other misinformed people, listen to everything the media says without knowing the story.
Easy to judge when you are safely in the US! Oh, by the way, wonder who fought for your freedom of speech? Aaah, there were probably some generals involved, you think?

2007-11-10 14:12:03 · answer #5 · answered by rakkasanwife 2 · 0 0

"Whiskey Pete" is slang for moonshine which is consumed by vagrants, tramps and hobos. And the British MP in the video has even been discredited by the most anti-war elements on his own benches.
BTW, the correct military slang expression for white phosphorous is "Willie Peter".

2007-11-10 12:46:36 · answer #6 · answered by desertviking_00 7 · 0 0

The incompetency is in the idiot who would ask such a question and the ones that would agree with you. If you have all the answers and knowledge and know how, then why the hell aren't you running the show???

2007-11-10 12:54:41 · answer #7 · answered by Fancy 4 · 0 0

I think it is impossible for an army of a democratic nation to fight effectively when they only have military power and not moral power behind them.

The war in Iraq is immoral and pointless and this poisonous atmosphere has always demoralized the American armed forces, in Korea and in Vietnam.

American soldiers always fight well, but winning tactically (with weapons) is not the same as winning strategically (in the long run) or politically (in the eyes of the world).

The generals are not "incompetent", they are fighting yesterday's war quite well and today's war badly

Well maybe that is incompetence, of vision, not tactics.

2007-11-10 12:13:06 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 5

do you have anything more mainstream instead of rat poop liberalsd? give me the names of these marines and their duty station? Show me where napalm is illegal. Where is the physical proof? Testimony can be staged as we have already seen with MacBeth.

2007-11-10 13:43:48 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

replace them demote them get them out of office but keep them in a spot where they could be returned to office also keep the fact from public it is a dangerous move though it can be interpeted as provoking them

2007-11-10 13:24:56 · answer #10 · answered by Demotheneses 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers