Again, the end does not justify the means. "I don't care what they do so long as I don't know about it?" Talk about your head in the sand.
I dont know. Might have been that whole cold war thing and our concerns about the numbers of ICBM's we didnt know about. Fact is I could have used any other nation as an example and you would have rightfully asked the same. Using the Russians was the only way I could have verified my point without sounding like a spectator. Thanks for asking. :thumb:
Sure the end justifies the means....sure it does. Does the means of sending our troops at Normandy up the beach into German crossfire ending in sure death for some justify the end? Wave after wave? On the surface without context it seems wasteful or cruel or just plain stupid. But when put into the proper context it makes sense because it worked. And as citizens we don't have some Constitutional right to know every technique our military uses to do their jobs. They have a job to do and if that means lobbing off heads, waterboarding, car batteries attached to bad places, so be it. From our enemy, I wouldn't expect anything less to be done to me if captured by one of these fanatics. And say what you want, waterboarding has worked and worked well. Terrorists are telling our troops if their mothers wear red panties after 30 seconds......sounds like to me the ends is justifying the means pretty clearly. You worried about the longterm psychological effects of waterboarding on terrorists? Talk about the need to grow up and join the real world. Who cares how scarred a terrorist is after our troops get through with them? I sure don't.
Easy to say, but I was looking for some concrete examples. The problem with the war in Iraq is not about the US having a smaller military, it is about poor use of the small but extremely powerful and dangerous militray that we have. That poor use falls squarely on Bush. I call it reality and I would put the blame where it belongs-- in four different administrations. But I don't even cast blame here. The Cold War miltary was outdated and bloated and needed to evolve and modernize and that is exactly what happened. It got leaner, meaner, better trained, and better equipped. New doctrines replaced old ones. Todays military is more effective, more mobile, and more violent than it has ever been. Nobody in the world can match US logistics. We can bring the force anywhere. Nobody else can do that. We absolutely own the oceans of this planet and can establish air supremacy wherever we need to. Yeah, the army is smaller, but entirely capable if is not squandered. Bush 41's army demolished the Iraq army in Kuwait in 100 hours. Clinton's Air Force brought Yugoslavia to the peace tables without a single American casualty, and Bush 43's army defeated Iraq's entire army and sacked their capital in 21 days! Our Special Operations Forces overthrew Taliban Afghanistan using mostly native troops. There ain't a damn thing wrong with our military when it is used properly. The problem in Iraq is not military, it is political. The reasons for going to war were not military, but political. Nation-building in Iraq is not a military operation, it is a political one. Bill Clinton is not the reason we are mired in Iraq. The military has done its job in the successful invasion. It was simply given a unnecessary, foolish, and unwinnable occupation mission in trying to create a Jeffersonian democracy out of the political cesspool that is Iraq. It's just not a military job.
Red, your post does have merit my friend. You have finally said some things that I agree with. lol. True, the bush administration has made a complete blunder of the whole thing. Their biggest mistake was thinking that knocking off the mad man would leave everyone dancing in the streets. Well it did, for about 5 hot minutes. Then the shia that had been oppressed for over 4 decades remembered, "hey wait a minute, we are the majority in this **** hole" and thats when all hell broke loose. Mistake #2 Firing EVERYONE in the iraqi army thus ailienating them from wanting to work for/with us which eliminated any chance of us cutting off the insurgency before it ever got started. Had we done preserved some of these resources instead of turning them against us it just may be a different story today. We lost valuable time and contacts chasing the WMD's (which on a side bar I've talked to many iraqis who say without a doubt that they are there, they are still there and the only person that knows where they are was hung) I will also agree that yes, the military is mobile and quick and logistics are top notch. You don't have to tell me, I'm a card carrying member. However I will tell you that from someone on the inside we need more troops. We've always needed more troops. True the big bad USSR that we were worried about in the 80's is a completely different threat than what we face today, however even with our superior talent, technique and equipment it's just not sustainable at the current OPTEMPO. Is it a product of 4 administrations? Very well could be and I won't dispute that because I don't know for sure and don't really care or want to spend the time to look it up. It's not going to change anything. The point I was trying to make was the force took a huge cut in #'s under the cigar wielding govenor from R-kansas. Again don't have time nor the motivation to look it up to give you "concrete" numbers, you can do that on your own beings you are so net savy. I'm by no means a big "Bush" supporter, but he does his best to protect this country and while he has made a lot of mistakes, they aren't all on his shoulders. He has military adivsors that have made mistakes, he has had SECDEFs that has made mistakes and with all that said, being an American, and being an active duty service member who has spent too many years of my life on foreign soil, I'm glad I had to do it under W than to have had to do it under Kerry. Geaux Tigers
Perhaps. Had Timothy McVeigh been rolled by an agent with a fist full of information... http://www.crimelibrary.com/serial_k...dawning_1.html :911:
What in the hell do you think goes on during a war? Decisions are made knowing soldiers will die. Decisions are made knowing innocent people will die, it's called collateral damage. No offense, but you are an example of why Americans don't need to know all the details of what our military does behind closed doors. All too many can't handle the reality of war and live in a fantasyland.
