Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When an active duty guy tries to complain in this forum , the War Supporters turn on him right away. Stop your whining, you volunteered, they will say. Easy for them to say that. They support the troops so long as they act like robots and don't complain or ask questions. I will bet you that many of the people that do not support Iraq will turn around and support Afghanistan, since that has much more of a direct correlation to a threat against the United States. Tryoing to compare feelings against Iraq to Vietnam is completely unfair. Only a couple fringe loonies are saying anything against the troops on a personal level, not like the entire population was back in the 1960s.
What if I told you that the head of Al-Queida was here in Iraq, would having the brains of AQI in Iraqi and its main infrastructure of terror in Iraq make any difference to how you felt about the Iraqi campaign?
Cuz guess where it is, and it isn't near Pakistan!
Glitch I disagree and it is not always true that the masses are ignorant.Troops are caught in the middle sometimes,they have the duty to do what the president orders them to do but the government is liable to the people.
You can disagree all you like, but the fact remains that if you claim "I support the troops, but not the war" then one or both of those two claims is a lie. If one truly supported the troops, then they must also support their mission. Otherwise our troops would be fighting and dieing in vain, and that is not supporting the troops.
As long as the majority of Americans depend on their news from mainstream media, which is both against the war and the troops, they will continue to be the "ignorant masses."
Quote:
Originally Posted by lionking
It is important both for the citizens and the government to use great care and thought to how we use our military and defining a mission,otherwise abuse of the military and unclear missions will occur.It was Clinton's use of the military in that manner that PO'd many with then Bush campaigning on humble foreign policy,responsible government and no nation building yet now we have adopted a policy that we will not only go after those that attack us but go after their 2nd cousin's just because they might also.
You are mistaken. Civilians have no say in the matter beyond electing their representatives. Congress declares wars, and the President executes the war as Commander-In-Chief. If you didn't like your representative's vote on the war, then by all means vote for someone else. If you don't like how the President is excersizing his role as Commander-In-Chief, then by all means vote for someone else. Beyond that, civilians have no say. See Article IV, Section 4 of the US Constitution. The US has a republican form of government, not a democracy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lionking
As far as discloser of classified info.There are shades of grey in such matters.It is one thing to do a classified op to strike a target,it is another to go on the media a sell a war and occupation of a nation.
You speak of war and occupation as if they were two separate things. If you actually expect to win a war, then occupation is a necessity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lionking
The fact is many were wanting revenge (including me) and many were ignorant (including me) to the complexity of culture over there.Many Americans tend to look at Iraqis as basically one people not realizing the different secs and hate between the classes there.Which is another reason to consider long and hard before thinking we can just bring Democracy to a nation and all will embrace it.
Their culture has nothing to do with anything. Congress declared war against terrorism (not just al Qaeda either) on Sep. 18, 2001 (see Public Law 107-40). President Bush sent our military to Afghanistan and Iraq in order to remove from power two governments that had a lengthy, and current, history of sponsoring international terrorist organizations. Our military accomplished both those objectives in short order with minimal casualties. Our service men and women should take pride in that accomplishment. I know that I am proud of what they achieved.
To claim that one does not support the mission is saying that those soliders who were wounded or died in order to accomplish that mission were wounded or died in vain, needlessly. It is not supporting the troops when someone considers their actions to be needless or in vain. Not only does it undermine troop morale, it is a grave insult to those fighting to accomplish their mission.
ok Glitch and Bigjohn under your asessment of what supporting troops means let me rephrase my thoughts...........
I do not support our troops being used as pawns in a mission that has no clear end,that is such a broadly defined mission with poor insight into the region's culture and internal forces of Iraq.I think we went there ultra patriotic thinking America is such a Billy badass that America could never bite off more than it could chew and has lost principles of the point that people have the right to determine their own way of life while most American's have no knowledge of the fact that some cultures are so different that they don't want us saving them and bringing a form of government they don't want.
For the troops I hope they do as much good as they can helping the Iraqi's build in the mean time though I suspect in the end the nation will implode into a civil war no matter how much we try to change it to a Democracy.I hope the troops watch each other's back and kill as many insurgents as they can in self defense until we can get them the hell out of there.If you really want to do the Iraqis a favor put a 2nd amendment to keep arms in their Constitution and let them battle it out.Then they will have earned the right to decide their fate.
During the 4th I watched the history channel much of the day on the American revolution and one point struck home with me.American's avoided direct battles for the most part but made the British parents loosing their sons realize that the cost wasn't worth fighting for.We are a nation born from being insurgents in a way,we a rag tag bunch beat the best army in the world at the time.The best army in the world will always be vulnerable to guerilla tactics and that's why avoiding being put in a fight like that is the best thing to do.With RPG's,AK's and IED's the insurgents don't need to win a major battle,they just need to make the mission so costly that it becomes a never ending situation and you can kill them and there will be more to replace them unless you just Atomize the entire region wiping a entire culture from the face of the Earth.
And if foreigners came to America to bring their idea of government and beat our military they would be met with snipers and guerillla tactics also because alot of Americans would never become docile to a foreign invader
I hope we aid the soldiers when they come back and deliver the financial and health support they were promised and seperate the scorn on their efforts from the misuse the government has deployed them for.
I whole heartedly support our troops in Afghanistan,wipe out the Taliban and Al Queda,set up provisional government then leave.
If this thought makes troops feel they are abandoned well I'm sorry but this idea of "patriot correctness", stay silent to the misuse of troops otherwise you are not a patriot is akin to the" political correctness" ideal that liberals use to hush opposition.
Also,the idea that elected leaders are in total power to make decisions for the country while in power I believe is false,we may be a Republic but we are a Constitutional Republic with a set of laws that limits the government from doing "whatever they want" even if they are a elected majority.
If the government was empowered to do what ever they desire without thought of the people while in power there would be no difference from having one single tyrant king and a Congress filled with tyrants.
agreed in the reply as the way it was delivered yet I fear some have adopted the Capt Ahab doctrine that revenge is more important even if it destroys the ship and crew in the end and that revenge for 9-11 trumps all reason.
agreed in the reply as the way it was delivered yet I fear some have adopted the Capt Ahab doctrine that revenge is more important even if it destroys the ship and crew in the end and that revenge for 9-11 trumps all reason.
The problem with Iraq is we are past the point of no return. We either finish what we started or we will really pay for it later. Forget about why we went there. That isn't really relevent to finishing what we started. Iraq must be able to stand on its own or they will fall into the hands of such govs as Iran. Do we really want a clone of Iran? I wish we could pull the troops out today and bring them all home. The fact is that we can't.
The problem with Iraq is we are past the point of no return. We either finish what we started or we will really pay for it later. Forget about why we went there. That isn't really relevent to finishing what we started. Iraq must be able to stand on its own or they will fall into the hands of such govs as Iran. Do we really want a clone of Iran? I wish we could pull the troops out today and bring them all home. The fact is that we can't.
that is something worth considering true.
Yet it seems there are a certain amount of American's who think once we pull them out of Iraq then send them to Iran,Syria,Yemen,maybe Lebanon after that and do a Iraq all over again.
Yet it seems there are a certain amount of American's who think once we pull them out of Iraq then send them to Iran,Syria,Yemen,maybe Lebanon after that and do a Iraq all over again.
I don't think we need to worry about moving into Iran or Syria. We learned a hard lesson in Iraq. For some folks only an iron fist style of leadership can maintain the peace. Old feuds left unsettled are just waiting to explode.
Not our problem and for sure not our fight.
The argument can be made that if we spent the money that was spent in Iraq on securing our borders and all points of entry then we still would not have a big concern.
Lets face it 911 happened because we made security a very low priority.
Quite honestly it still is. Our borders are still wide open.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
