Besides, 4000 thousand American lives and many times more that number of wounded as a reminder that the most sophisticated war machine in the world is not invincible.
Some food for thought.
2007-12-25 10:07:47 · 27 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
I love the "We are winning h war, they are winning the politics,the propoganda" argument.......ITS THE SAME THING FOOL!!!!
Dont make me quote Clauswitz.
Tet was a total disaster from a millitary standpoint, but a HUGE VICTORY for the Vietnamese, because it broke the will of their enemy to fight.....they won.
The minimal number of casualties that the US public is capable of sustaining before looking for a way out means that assymetrical warfare is a very viable option against "the greatest millitary in the world".
"They are cowards" I love that one too. No, they aren't idiots, just like the bushwacking minutemen who picked off British officers in 1776 and then melted into the woods.
Credit where credit is due. The US is fighting a determined enemy, hampered by poor intelligence and some big mistakes in the first few months.
2007-12-26 05:40:28 · answer #1 · answered by Paul B 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Besides, 4000 thousand American lives and many times more that number of wounded as a reminder that the most sophisticated war machine in the world is not invincible.
Some food for thought.
first problem it is 4 thousand or four thousand not 4000 thousand that's not even a number
second we are not a war machine
we have won most of the hearts and minds of the Iraqis but like you a few bad apples spoil the bushel
next if you would like to spend some time over there i can help you out maybe a little bit of service to you country would help you pull your head out of your ass
SSG ADA
2007-12-25 18:32:30 · answer #2 · answered by adasgt1981 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Gee.. just what do you consider a "handful"? In your numbering system Bill Gates has a "few" dollars.. If you actually cared about our troops and the war effort there could be a rational discussion here. However just to give an answer:
1. One of the biggest reasons is that we are pulling our punches, partly to assuage the PC wusses that cry at every little bump and bruise that any that claim to be a civilian receive. Take the gloves off of our troops and the battle will be over very quickly.
2. We are fighting a war not against other solgers, but against terrorist in civilian clothes that take a couple of shots or plant bombs and are gone. In additon they are continuely resupplied (both in manpower and arms) by outside (Iran, Syria, probably the Saudis) powers. That makes it a little more difficult.
3. But even with both arms and a leg tied behind our backs we are *STILL* winning the ground battle... however the propaganda war is being lost because of the totally and only negitive reporting of the media *AND* the aid and comfort and encouragement given to the enemy by the Democrat Party. If it weren't for those treasonous SOBs we might well have won this battle and be pulling our troups out by now.
2007-12-25 18:47:17 · answer #3 · answered by lordkelvin 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wow u obviously know nothing about this topic huh. Keep watching CNN if u want to be mislead some more. Oh and u try fighting an enemy that is scared to come out of hiding. The majority of the few deaths we have in Iraq are from IEDs not insurgents fighting us. Also if the liberals in Washington DC would let us fight the enemy the way we should the war would be over. We have to wait till they shoot at us to shoot back or we go to jail and by the tme we can shoot back they are long gone.
2007-12-25 19:18:30 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
You don't know much about Vietnam, do you.
There, the French tried for 20 years. The first U.S. "military advisors" were sent there in 1948.....So, the U.S. tried for another 20 plus years...and failed.
Why?
You cannot fight a war when you can't identify the enemy. You can't fight a war where the enemy has no headquarters, no uniforms, no country, no generals, no identity. You cannot win a war when the "insurgents" live among the civilians, hide their few weapons in mosques or churches, mingle with the civilian population.
Bush and Co. should have known that. Of course, Bush dodged the draft for Vietnam, so he had no knowledge of guerilla warfare...neither did Cheney - who got SEVEN deferments to avoid military service in Vietnam.
We cannot "win" in Iraq. We simply will leave - and the country will blow wide open...just like Vietnam. Many will be slaughtered and many others will fight each other for control.... Sooner or later, a victor will rise to the top, take control of Iraq and be the new dictator.....
It doesn't matter how big our military is, or how well-equipped it is, or how many young soldiers we throw into that awful place, victory is not a possibility.
We can all thank Bush and Co for that fiasco.
2007-12-25 18:50:24 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
The same reason that we still have criminals in the US. Terrorism will always be an ongoing problem. It will never be defeated but has been substantially reduced.
Had the military been able to fight this war as they did in WWII without the liberal cries to protect innocent civilians the war would be farther along. To quickly end a war you need to win it by use of overwhelming power and devastation other wise the war goes on forever and more lives are lost over time than would have been lost in a quick deadly war.
2007-12-25 18:37:49 · answer #6 · answered by Homeless in Phoenix 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
First off, a very large number of fighters in Iraq are from countries all over the world not just a handful of disgruntles Iraqi's. Second they would have had much more success if they just went into an area and laied waste to the place rather than
bending over backwards to not cause civilian casualties.
2007-12-25 20:48:07 · answer #7 · answered by booboo 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are way off the mark.
From a military perspective, they are not defeating us.
From a political and information aspect they are winning. Your question is an example of that.
2-3 Americans might die or be wounded, ON A BAD DAY. 20-30 of the enemy are killed or captured that same day. Its not the Military that is the problem. The Military is doing its job. Its the other aspects that are not working; political, information, economical, etc.
2007-12-25 18:26:31 · answer #8 · answered by mnbvcxz52773 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
If America would have used her military to its' FULL potential, Iraq would have been nuked flat and the war would have been over in less than an hour.
Anyway, the tactics that are being used against us in Iraq are the SAME tactics WE used against the British during the Revolutionary War. Back then Britain's military was considered the most powerful in the world.
Food for thought.
2007-12-25 18:33:19 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
i am currently serving the USMC and i'll have to agree with a few people. going into a different culture not knowing terrain, not knowing the people and establishing respect and trust with them, not neglecting to mention that insurgents DO in fact look like every one else, and to top it off, IED's that we hit come in all shapes and sizes from pepsi bottles to our very own MRE bags. the US does not have the best military in the world nor is it the most disciplined but we are some of the most determined and thats what gets us through. i bet if you did some type of training or attempted to do so you might understand better. just honor who's over there and what they're doing. we're just like you, we just have done a bit more to try to make a difference and remember we're humans not robots. we don't do everything perfect
2007-12-25 18:32:39 · answer #10 · answered by Valhalla * 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋