This war is taking too long!

from JoeUser Forums
This war has lasted longer than we were at war in WWII. This is not true! The war in Iraq only lasted six weeks. We are now in the war on terrorist.

Do you expect us to be in Iraq forever? No, just until things are stable.

Keep in mind that we are currently fighting a war in Korea that started around 1950 we have had troops in Korea for over fifty years! No complaints over that because it was a UN war and we got stuck with the check. WWII ended in Europe in 1945 yet we kept almost half a million troops in Germany and we only started reducing those troop levels around 1995 but troops are still there. WWII ended in Japan in 1945 and we still keep troops in Japan. When our government wanted to bring democracy to Germany and Japan we were told by the experts that it would be a waste of manpower and money that those people would not know what to do with democracy. Keeping troops in those countries to force stabilization only artificially props up puppet governments that the people would not support. All of this is being said with Afghanistan and Iraq. In every case it has worked and never has it failed yet we still hear that it is a bad idea to do this.
In Japan our troops were attacked by Japanese troops who resented our occupation of their homeland. The same happened in Germany. This is not a new strategy it is a time tested one. In Germany the Soviets tried to mess with us so we would fail. With the entire resources of the Soviet Union it still failed to stop us. They tried in Japan as well, along with China and North Korea. We are still providing stabilization in Korea, and we are still fighting insurgents in South Korea. The only real difference is we have a president that wants to win the war and the detractors are in our own government.

So tell me JU why is it we don’t want to win this war where the enemy has said they will not stop until we are all converted or dead?
Our president stated that this war will go on long after he has left office. Yet I hear people say we need to end this war no matter what because it has been going on longer than WWII. If that is the only excuse then that is a very weak excuse!
6,325 views 19 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
because bush is in office
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
So tell me JU why is it we don’t want to win this war where the enemy has said they will not stop until we are all converted or dead?


Because you can never win a war against an ideology. To wage and win a war you need to fight an enemy against which victory or defeat can be measured.

In a "war on terror", when do we win? When there are no terrorists (In other words, never)? If we fight a war against an ideology, we are virtually assured peace can never be achieved.

But I'm beginning to believe that is precisely what some people WANT.
Groupy 2 - Organize multiple applications into grouped tabs on your Windows desktop
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
But I'm beginning to believe that is precisely what some people WANT. - Gideon

Something had to replace the cold war to justify all that military spending and people keeping their heads down. The government must constantly remind us that we need to continue paying it or our lot will suffer.
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
actually the cold war was designed to keep the rescission from hitting for as long as possible instead of right after ww2.
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
So tell me JU why is it we don’t want to win this war where the enemy has said they will not stop until we are all converted or dead?


That's easy.  Because liberals and democrats don't believe that terrorists want us dead, or a world-wide islamic state.  They beleive terrorism exists because of Bush, because of the U.S., and any other excuse that they can come up with.

Terrorists are just "victims" in the liberal mind.
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
actually the cold war was designed to keep the rescission from hitting for as long as possible instead of right after ww2.


Do you have any proof of this? I always thought the cold war was because Europe wanted to dominate the world and we got suckered into it.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
Something had to replace the cold war to justify all that military spending and people keeping their heads down. The government must constantly remind us that we need to continue paying it or our lot will suffer.


Please explain this if you can.
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
Do you have any proof of this? I always thought the cold war was because Europe wanted to dominate the world and we got suckered into it.


yes it is called the great depression,. and the depression that started in 1998. they both started at the sametime period after the end of their respective wars.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
yes it is called the great depression,


The great depression came in 1929 which was ten years after WWI and ten years before the start of WWII, after WWII we had ten years of unprecedented growth and prosperity the cold war started right after WWII 1946 and ran until 1994. During that time we had recessions and depressions, all caused by bad fiscal policies initiated by stupid leaders. The democrats wanted to raise taxes and the President wanted to cut taxes. He got his tax cut and we had great growth. After Mr. Kennedy left us the democrats began to spend and tax and we ended up with inflation beyond belief. Mr. Nixon took office and was not cutting taxes because he needed the money to fight the Vietnam war started by the previous administration and the congress was controlled by the democrats that were not going to give him a break. When Mr. Ford took office we were starting another slide because the interest rate was climbing and we were still paying for the war. When Mr. Carter took office we were on the brink of another great depression and instead of cutting taxes he raised taxes and we ended up with 18% interest rates and unemployment that rivaled the great depression. Mr. Reagan took office and cut taxes and people got jobs and made money. Mr. Bush took office and raised taxes and the nation started to spiral down. Mr. Clinton took office and raised taxes to make money for the government and we had record unemployment again and the nation was headed for a large fall. Mr. Bush took office and cut taxes and the economy turned around and we have had record growth and a reduction of the deficit even with a full blown world war going on we are still making money. After the hit on 9/11 and the hurricanes that have hit us during his administration we should be on the brink of a depression if not already steeped in a depression. The cold war and hot wars have had little to do with the economy; it all has to do with our political leadership.
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
all of that is true we did have some minor depressions. but for almost ten years after the cold war we had unprecedented growth and prosperity and then we entered a depression almost as bad as the great depression. the only real difference is that the great depression affected the whole world. and the last depression mostly only affected the united states and you might say russia.
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
all of that is true we did have some minor depressions.


I am assuming you are an American, because of this you have not paid attention to world news. Let me give you an example to prove my point. The rest of the world was in a recession since the 1980’s Japan is just coming out of the depression that almost brought down the economy of every nation on Earth. In 1980 Japan’s economy was the model of the world. What we did not know was there economy was build on a very fragile foundation. It collapsed in 1986 and no one noticed until 1989. Japan was almost where it was at the end of WWII and it took until 2005 before it recovered. They had massive unemployment and for the first time since before WWI they had massive lay offs. This in a culture where if you were hired you were hired for life, so a single layoff is the sign that the corporation is in deep trouble, to lay off millions means their economy is so low they have to mail it fresh air and sun light. It has nothing to do with the cold war or hot war, it has to do with fiscal mismanagement. In Japan the corporations not the government set fiscal policy, it was not their greed but their culture that caused the problems.

A secretary makes nine thousand a year gets a credit card and spends thirty-six thousand that year. She can’t pay it back and the credit card company can’t get that money back because of the culture which says that an honorable person can not be treated badly like a law suit to collect the money. To say the secretary was dishonorable would destroy her career. She would not be fired but she would not get promoted ever again. When you have a trillion dollars tied up in bad loans your economy will fall. Everyone wanted to be associated with Japan so when they fell everyone fell. We were not as deeply associated with their economy so we took a small hit while in Europe they are still hurting. Look it up it is all fact.

Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
Something had to replace the cold war to justify all that military spending and people keeping their heads down. The government must constantly remind us that we need to continue paying it or our lot will suffer.


So lets pretend that neither exists. Then we can all live happily ever after.

Well, maybe except those Hungarians, and Poles.

And maybe all those Israel Athletes

And Maybe those Israelis

And maybe all those Spaniards

And maybe all those English

And maybe all those Australians

And maybe all those Phillipinos

And maybe all those Morocans

And maybe all those Russians

But hey! No Americans, right?
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
In a "war on terror", when do we win? When there are no terrorists (In other words, never)? If we fight a war against an ideology, we are virtually assured peace can never be achieved.


No true!

The cold war was a war of ideology more than a war of bullets and bombs. It was a war we won on all fronts. It took fifty plus years to win but we did win. The critics said that it could not be done and that we were fighting a lost cause. It was just America against North Korea, Cuba, China and the Soviet Union plus all their puppet states. China was the first to crack and signed a treaty with the US in the 70’s. The Soviet Union was next when it collapsed under the weight of its own greed and stupidly. North Korea and Cuba are almost starved out Cuba makes money with tourism and North Korea is losing a few thousand people a day because they can’t feed themselves. They are the last hold out and to keep itself relevant they are helping other enemies like Saddam insane and AQ and anyone else that can pay for what he has. So a war on ideology can be won. No one now believes that communism is the way to go except the stupid liberals who gave excuse after excuse as to why each communist country could not beat America and capitalism.
Now we have terrorism and the same stupid liberals wish to claim them as the new great way of life. Excuse after excuse as to why they are justified in attacking and killing us any where in the world. The facts are that they murdered us because of our support of friends and allies. We supported the Muslims against the Christians in Eastern Europe, we supported the Muslims against the Soviets yet we are the bad guys. It is not ideology that we are at war with, we are at war with power hungry people that believe that if you don’t become like them then you are deserving of death. Nothing like having nice rational people as an enemy. These people are of the same stripe as Hitler, it’s made up of people that would fit right in with the Nazi ideology of superior race only in their case it is religion. The ends justify their means and it is all ok with their version of God even if their actions are contrary to the actual beliefs of the religion they claim to be defending. It is just hate, to motivate and recruit. It is power they crave and death is there business.
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
Being close to many people over there fighting I can say this:

The OVERWHELMING concensus is that the administration is trying to fight a "polite war".
War should never be polite, politically correct or humane.

Fight to win or don't pick a fight.\

(sorry to any of you party-line hacks [on either side])
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
The OVERWHELMING concensus is that the administration is trying to fight a "polite war".
War should never be polite, politically correct or humane.

Fight to win or don't pick a fight.\


this is all true.
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
The OVERWHELMING concensus is that the administration is trying to fight a "polite war".
War should never be polite, politically correct or humane.

Fight to win or don't pick a fight.\


this is all true.


Thank you. This means if you need some A-10 Warthogs to cut a swath of death through a suburban neighborhood to get to 3 assholes sniping from a mosque, then that's what's gotta be done.

Or just level the mosque and 5 miles around it. What ever happened to "Sherman's march to the sea" - type of warfare? ("It is well that war is so terrible or we should grow too fond of it.")

We are no longer terrible. No one is afraid of the USA anymore.

Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
no it means you do what you have to to get the war over as fast as possible. that way no one else has to die afterwords.


Patton said it you do what you have to do to win the war and then apologize afterwords.
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top
The purpose of the military is to kill people and break things.
So says Eric Haney SgtMaj. USA

The liberals over the last 40 years have tried to make the military all warm and fuzzy. These people are outraged when the military actually kill the enemy. As if the military is not supposed to do that.

This has been the least violent war on record for our nation yet the military is still called baby killers and murderers.

Paladin,
Sgt. USMC ret.
Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top
Erm, I was actually smashing the current handling of the war. They are not fighting to win. (the politicians).