Putting Saddam's conviction into perspective

RDX said:
So what is a threat? People go on and on that the troops should not go overseas and should just camp in the states and "protect our borders". These are the same people that argued for our neutrality in both of the world wars. The same people condemned Vietnam and Korea as a waste that accomplished nothing. It's very easy to complain about the lives and money spent in these conflicts, but what would the world look like if these actions were not taken? It's hard to say.

Is a country a threat to us that is a threat to its neighbors? Not directly… but using a strategy that is entire reactive to imminent threats is foolish indeed. We live in the 21st century, not the 18th century. It doesn’t take hordes of men and artillery massing across a countries border to pose a threat.

Since you say that Iraq was never a threat to us, what ever has been? Is there any county that we have invaded that was legitimate in your opinion?
Click to expand...

Actually Iraq wasn't a threat to anybody.
 
They weren't threatening Kuwait or Israel and didn't really have the ability to do so.

Their own people? We've killed tens of thousands of them.
 
Gato_Solo said:
So...once again...the US military is not allowed to do our job the way we're supposed to. Civilians and politicians in general have no idea how our job is supposed to be done, but always seem to have an opinion that we're doing it wrong. Guess thats what comes from a country that doesn't respect its military, though...

And the beat goes on...
Click to expand...

well i'm just speaking for myself here but i never saw this as a military issue.

the "civilian (leader)s and politicians" ARE the issue, and bear responsibility for making successively poor decisions in trying to run a serious war on-the-cheap AND without really listening to the military (until recently, though we'll see how profound the "listening" really is). i'm sure you could fill in the details here far better than i could.

i've always had a healthy respect for the military. my criticisms of the war are not directed at the military. Same with the vast majority of folks in 'merica, i think, except for a few folks like "cry me a river" spike...
 
Unfortunately, defaming the leaders (Commander in Chief, Sec'y of Defense) while at war is demoralizing to the troops & ultimately lessening the quality of the job done since, if their heart isn't fully in it or they are questioning the purpose you'll get les than 100% which in turn gets troops killed.
 
spike said:
The job is to protect the country. Iraq was never a threat. Cry me a river.
Click to expand...

Kipling said:
Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap;
An' hustlin' drunken soldiers when they're goin' large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin' in full kit.
Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, 'ow's yer soul?"
But it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll,
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll.
Click to expand...

I don't think you fully understand that part...
 
You said:

So...once again...the US military is not allowed to do our job the way we're supposed to. Civilians and politicians in general have no idea how our job is supposed to be done, but always seem to have an opinion that we're doing it wrong.
Click to expand...

The thing is it has nothing to do with the way the military does their job or mocking them. It has to do with the idea that the military shouldn't be there in the first place because Iraq is no threat and the reasons we went there in the first place all turned out to be false.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top