|
|
 |
Reply
| | From:  -Lady_Di- (Original Message) | Sent: 1/25/2007 6:49 PM |
After two weeks of listening to this BS, I am convinced that no one knows what the heck is goin on. If you listen to the troops on the ground, they say that 22,000 is no where near enough to get the job done. If you listen to the brass, they say that 22,000 more troops will work, along with shifting troops on the ground from one area to the other as needed. (Thus extending the tours for those already over there btw.) If you listen to the politicians, nothing is going to ever work & we need to get the heck out of there. Do you see any solutions? |
|
 First
Previous
2-7 of 7
Next
Last
|
Reply
| |
i think to win this war we have to put at least another 150,000 on the field over there. 21,000 is just another bandaid to cover a gapeing wound. Getting out sounds good but would cost us more over the long run. We could get the job done with the numbers we have now but it will take many years to do so. However our people over there are doing a really great job. I know they keep pounding the 3,000 plus who have died every night but....... Do you know how great that number really is? We love ten times that many in less time in nam. And remember most of the deaths here are not from battle but from ambush. Right or wrong on going in, we made the mess and have to clean it up. jerald |
|
Reply
| |
I agree that cutting & running would just create a bigger mess & a greater threat to the US in the long run. One of the problems is that we are trying to bring peace to a society and a culture that has never known peace in any form. Iraq is the oldest populated space on the planet. People from the begining of time have been fighting over it. It is the land of Babylon. It has been conquered & reconquered more times than Bush has changed his mind. No matter what we do or do not do.... there will never be peace as we understand it, in Iraq. Though the death toll is low when compared to Vietnam, one of the large differences is the incredible advances in trauma care at front line hospitals & MASH's. Injuries that would have killed a soldier in 'Nam, are survivable in Iraq. (Which is going to lead to another future problem that Bush refuses to address, our f(&*ed up VA health care system. But that's another debate.) No matter what direction this goes, we as a society loose. We loose some of our best & brightest to insanity & fanatisism. We will pay dearly down the road if Iran is allowed to get a greater foothold in Iraq. It's a no win situation. |
|
Reply
| |
war should be a no win di, for both sides. the costs on both sides should be high to make them think twice next time. |
|
Reply
| |
Wouldn't it be nice if we had progressed to that point Jerald. |
|
Reply
| |
no diane, the real problem is we have gone to far the other way. we are so worried about the real cost of war we don't put enough in at first to win it and then get bogged down. we didn't do it right in nam and we didn't do it right here. and the sad part is we have the best trained army in the world. we just didn't use it in the numbers needed because the powers that be were too afraid of what it would look like on cnn and fox news. yes we have lost over 3000 men and women in the past 4 years. still a very small number when it comes to war. freedom isn't free, its paid for in lives and heartbreak. we seem to have forgotten that. |
|
Reply
| |
I do think you are right Jerald. The numbers on the ground should have been much greater. Having a greater strength would have enabled us to control more territory before they had time to get organised or go underground. It is truly a case of history repeating itself. |
|
|
First
Previous
2-7 of 7
Next
Last
|
|
|
Free Forum Hosting
Important Announcement
Recommend
Return to Debate~Discuss