Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: freedom_is_earned
With all of your ranting one would expect that you understand this war to be completely different from World War II. Besides this war’s potential breadth and critical nature, there are very few similarities. And if you recall the first Gulf War, our military’s quick exit created an incredible amount of mistrust. Most in the region decided the U.S. could not be relied on to back the people in insurrection.

Nope. There is but one way to fight war. It must be fought to win as quickly as possible with a military agenda of victory as the sole purpose to where either the enemy is destroyed or looses the will or capabilities to fight and be a threat. It isn't policing another nation it is killing those who live in it. It is a punishment. You win by no holds barred fighting. You eventually loose douing otherwise and history proves it.

Do you consider it immoral to do so? I don't. It's like Sherman's march through Georgia no mercy and nothing left standing. Who says to fight our wars like that? Our Creator the Lord GOD. Read the book of Joshua and learn of his battles. Better yet for lessons in what national leaders are not to do look at King David where he refused to praise his troops who saved his kingdom from his son.

That is why war is a deadly serious act and should only be allowed with a declaration by congress. The soldiers must have the backing of the government and leaders over them. We owe them that much respect if we expect them to risk their lives. You don't send a man to battle and say don't shoot back or don't return fire in this or that area etc due to civilians. You just don't do so and win. In WW2 we destroyed cities with bombs. Yet today we can't manage to let a soldier return fire with a rifle without it possibly setting off a Court Martial? On that matter Bush was worse than even LBJ himself.

Do you know where our current Rules Of Engagement came from? It came from Marxist who took over universities and colleges and also wormed their way into our political system and even the military Chain of Command. Our R.O.E.'s of today the Generals of WW2 and earlier would have told POTUS what to do with them in short order and called him a bloody fool for even suggesting them.

If Bush SR had let the troops do their job in Gulf War one likely the second war and even the crisis in Iran could have been headed off.

Which brings up another matter. Every time there was a chance Israel might take care of a problem for us Bush sent either Powell or Rice there to stop them. Israel gets fired upon by Islamic terrorist and responds to it properly and on the plane hops our Sec of State to say No No musn't do. That was wrong. Many of the tyrants of the Middle East remained alive because of our State Departments insane meddling.

If Bush had butted out of Israels business they may have well resolved the current Iranian crisis for us like they did Saddam's nuclear program.

78 posted on 08/06/2010 3:43:08 AM PDT by cva66snipe (Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies ]


To: cva66snipe

Nope? Wrong answer, although I will agree we should have finished off Hussein the first time around. So, I suppose we’d still be there one way or another.


86 posted on 08/06/2010 4:15:22 PM PDT by freedom_is_earned
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson