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.
Do you understand the difference between a just and necessary war and invading a sovereign nation who was not attacking anyone?
And I shouldn't have to repeat this again, but I will:
We were dragged, kicking and screaming, into WWII.
Just a hint, when dealing with people who see the world in terms of overly simplistic, "good vs evil", the chances of having a reasoned and measured discussion go out the window.
What do you think the chances of leaving Iraq are by the end of an Obama administration? (even if it goes two terms)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LML
Generation after generation we offer up our young as cannon fodder. What or who do we think we appease with this sacrifice. Empire after empire crumbles under the twin weight of war debt and war dead....and each one thinks that their empire will endure forever. Wives mourn a lifetime, mothers wounds will never heal, fatherless...and now motherless.... children grow up amputated from a portion of their nurturing system....and swear it won't happen to their children. But the drum beat begins again and great...and not so great...orators come forth to convince yet another generation that they have the duty to die and kill for another's greed. Heaven help us all.
What you are describing was once more of a national sentiment. With today's professional force, the pain of loss is felt by far fewer Americans, and those that do often resign themselves to rationalizing that their sons, daughters, mothers, fathers, brothers and sisters did so on their of their own choice. If every person between 18-34 was required to serve in the military for min 2 years, without deferment or if there was a draft, then I suspect we might not even be in Iraq right now.
As Bacevich pointed out: The predominant mood of the country is not one of anger or anxiety but of dull acceptance. Vietnam divided Americans; the Long War has rendered them inert.
Somehow, it's not at all surprising that we didn't learn anything from Vietnam. The fact of the matter is, we hadn't learned anything from the French when we took over the Vietnam mess from them in the first place!
Somehow, it's not at all surprising that we didn't learn anything from Vietnam. The fact of the matter is, we hadn't learned anything from the French when we took over the Vietnam mess from them in the first place!
Well in the post Vietnam era, we adopted the professional soldier method and we engaged in small winnable wars with clearly defined goals. Desert Storm being the pinnacle example of this and also where it began to go wrong.
Post Desert Storm, the think tank types who never spend a day in a tank, such as Wolfowitz, Perle, Rumsfeld, Cheney et al, became emboldened by a string of successful military engagements. 'Hey, look how easy it was wiping the desert of the Iraqi army with our superior military equip'.
During the lead up to our invasion of Iraq, it was quite clear and evident that there was a divergence in thought between those think tank types and the actual military schooled generals. I believe General Tommy Franks was suggesting at least 300,000 troops would be needed to safely secure Iraq while Rumsfeld was suggesting less than 100,000.
I'm sure we all remember how we would be greeted as liberators and welcomed by the people of Iraq or how it would be a cake walk, etc... I believe this kind of thinking was born of an over estimation due to our success in a closed ended Desert Storm. I find it troubling that people like Franks, Sanchez, Powell and other generals and military planners were dismissed in favor of such ideologues that permeated the Bush administration.
Other than speeches, I haven't seen any Obama turn away from this open ended and perpetual method of occupation and engaging in war. While I realize that trillion is the new billion, a yearly cost of $864 billion (1) for just these two occupations and wars on top of our other military expenditures is bleeding our treasuries.
Sometimes praying and talking just doesn't cut it. Sometimes evil must be confronted with force and defeated.
I assume you thought the US should not have involved itself in WWII?
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene
We can only go by the content of ones posts in this kind of environment.
You are right, we can only go by the content of ones posts here. So, since we were talking about the open ended nature of the wars and occupations in Afghanistan and Iraq and how they resemble that of Vietnam, could you explain your content as to why you brought up WWII?
If you think a long war is expected in Iraq, just wait and see how long the one in Afghanistan takes as the goals there are even more obscure and undefined as those in Iraq.
Admittedly, it breaks my heart to think that the anti-war movement wasn't as much an anti-war movement as it was an anti-Bush movement, as indicated by Democrats support for our Afghanistan operations and dull acceptance of Iraq.
Te thing we didn't learn was that if you want to ain a war you have to fight and increase the effort unitl its actually ended and the nemey is destroyed. Looks like we had Iraq and now are just coasting to a loss.
Te thing we didn't learn was that if you want to ain a war you have to fight and increase the effort unitl its actually ended and the nemey is destroyed. Looks like we had Iraq and now are just coasting to a loss.
Haven't you ever heard of war for war's sake?
The "objective" is never defined - because there isn't any.
Get with it - this is the 21st century.
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.