Thread: U.S. Military

i support our military to the fullest of intents, but we went into a country this time that did nothing to us, but did a good thing for them. yet were still in the country that no matter the course will still fight with the other mid eastern countries around it. It has always been like that, and will not change, the military cannot be nurse maids forever when another threat could come from another country, that more likley is a bigger threat.

the US military will not be on top forever, so staying in this country that now is able for the most part to take of itself, is only hurting our cause. many countries do not like the USA for whatever reason they have, so in the end result this could be bad for our country if another was to come and take over. Its better for us to just take care of ourselves for now and just regroup intstead of spending money where were not needed anymore, let alone another counrty that we'll most likley spend another 5 or more years in trying to change them as well.

we have cause to do what we need to do to protect our people and ways, in all of the wars we have entered. WWI was neautral for the most part other than we were sending supplies to our allies to fight germany.
WWII hilter would have eventually come after us even if he had not killed US citizen upon a passing ship he decided was in the wrong. While this was going on, in europe in WWI and II japan decided they wanted more territory and attacked china, all the way down into some parts of the islands and a US military vessel in hawaii which they wanted back that we had taken from them some time earlier, while we were fighting across the other ocean. they had been building their own vessels in secret and planning an attack of their own the whole time.
im kinda vague on alot of the details since its been awhile since my american history classes, which i didnt like taking to begin with, but its a basic discription of what i remember, and hopefully its not too wrong

Originally Posted by 31 Bravo

I was just wondering what you guys thought about the military. weather were going the right thing by staying in Iraq and some of the other country were currently fighting in.

I know that i'm probly susposed to be going yeah lets show them whos boss but, I belive we should be out of there now. I belive it was right to go in there when we were atacked in 2001 but now it's getting old. were throwing so much money into this that... well it's a wast. Please note that I had no thoughts on this subject untill today; I was told that I was deploying out there 2 month after my AIT trainting was done with. witch I will be leaving for on the 29th. Thank you for your time.

I've said it once before, I'll say it again:

The U.S. had NO place in Iraq after the 9/11 attack! Afghanistan is home to more Al' Bhed--I mean Al' Queda (spelling) than any other country. If memory serves correct, most of the government there IS Al' Queda.

Osama Bin Laden LIVES in Afghanistan for Christ's sake!

It's about damn time we started sending troops there. We should've been fighting there instead of Iraq. Saddam Hussein posed no *immediate* threat to us. We could've waited to get rid of that guy--but no... Bush just had to fight daddy's war. Iraq isn't at war with us anymore. That war ended 21 days after it started. Now, it's just two different sects of Muslims waging battle of biblical proportions and we're just there to be the mediator, basically. Problems there will never be solved. I mean never... Never, ever, ever, ever; never!

Let's all hope that this crap in Afghanistan ends soon... Chaos_Tempest (fellow AO member and close friend of mine) will be there at the end of the month. Wish him luck!

Atom ant... (Hope you don't mind if I call you that, Atom Ant is cool)... Ever sense 9/11 we have had forces in Afganastan, its not like we are just sending them in now, we have been there far longer then Iraq. Once again the reason why we got involved in Iraq was because we thought Iraq had WMDs because Sadamised Hussain barred any UN weapons inspecters from the country. Also a word of note is that we were not the only ones thinking they had it, there were many other countries who believed they did as well and also wanted us to go in and take out Iraq to provent them from possibly suppling biological and chemical weapons to terrorist cells. Well we figured out that they did not have WMDs but sense we kind of beat the crap out of the Iraqy military and their Gov. structure it was our responsibility in cleaning up after our selves.

Grumble Grumble Grumble

Originally Posted by beast

The reason you go to war doesn't matter. What matter is that you win. And while they have killed many U.S. Service man it is estimated that 1 million Mujahideen have gone to meet allah. Now of course that is just an estimate but using the standard some estimates are 650,000 even the liberals argee that we have killed far more of them then they have of us. And that is the standard I use of whether we are winning or not. And we are.

This was also the concept that was used for the the Vietnam war, where the concept of the 'Body Count' first originated. It was also the case that many more communist insurgents were killed then US service men, but what was the end result of this conflict???

Originally Posted by Scourge

The Samuri-ish parties in Japan at the time saw their country as becoming to reliant of other nations for resorces and thus saw them selves as becoming to weak and leaniant and being pushed around. They wanted to mimic Britian and their Emperialism at the time by taking other countries terratories for resorces. Sense the Philipeans were under the US at the time and other naighboring countries were colonies of either France or Britian, they then decided to attack China for several reasons. 1: China has tones of resorces. 2: Japan and China despised each other. Japan attacked China and was very succesfull. Now China and Japan did not get along but China did really nothing that would provoke an attack from Japan. This aggressive act caused Japan to have sanctions placed on them by limiting the amount of scrap metal, oil, and other trade goods that were being sent to Japan as to deture Japan from continuing their invation of main land China. This caused the Japanies to realise that if the US continued to hold these sanctions on them then Japans economy would suphocate because Japan has vertualy zero mineral resorces and it got to a point where Japan had vertualy no oil and were ripping nails from old building to continue their forces in China. How ever Japan iventually were able to take over oil rigs and mines in China to continue to fund their war effert. After their near suffocation, Japan looked to the US more and more like an advosary that was in their way of greatness even though the sanctions that was placed upon them was because of their aggression towards China which was an allie and a big trading partner of the US.

So in other words, We did indirectly and nonviolently provoke Japan. It's just that we had good reasons to do so.

Still, nothing is ever truly good or bad. Everything has a plus side. Doesn't the embargo have a lot to do with Japan's success in big industry in the same way that Germany invented Fully Synthetic motor oil because they couldn't rely on foreign country's to supply them with traditional oil?

I'll admit, most of my knowledge on war revolves around Iraq were I have personal experience.

Originally Posted by LenMiyata

Grumble Grumble Grumble

This was also the concept that was used for the the Vietnam war, where the concept of the 'Body Count' first originated. It was also the case that many more communist insurgents were killed then US service men, but what was the end result of this conflict???

Body count has been around a lot longer than the vietnam war. The result is that we won. That is the goal. And a sharper military, Learning from each mistake. What were the vietnamese ever able to do to america. They accomplished nothing. We destroyed much of there country and they never came close to crossing the pacific to fight us. When we left we left a trail of 400,000 dead. An almost 20:1 loss ratio. The goal is always to win.

Grumble Grumble Grumble

Originally Posted by beast

...They accomplished nothing. We destroyed much of there country and they never came close to crossing the pacific to fight us. When we left we left a trail of 400,000 dead. An almost 20:1 loss ratio. The goal is always to win.

I doubt that any of the South Vietnam emigrants in the US would agree with this statement. The end result was that North Vietnam and the Vietcong accomplished their primary goal, the overthrow of a US backed client state and the reunification of their country. It also led to a 'domino effect' leading to the overthrow of US backed governments in Cambodia and Burma, resulting in a significant loss of world prestige and reputation which contributed to the 1973 Yom Kippur war against Israel. The Arab (and their Soviet supporters) believed that after the loss of the Vietnam war, the US would not have the will to intervene on behalf of the side of Israel, marking the country ripe for conquest and destruction.