Where is the anti-war movement?

We don't need anymore input from the anti-war crowd. All they do is get people like obama elected!

Originally posted by yak055h
reply to post by jam321

 

I agree Jam. When this conflict started the President responded to a MSM question saying that this will not become another Viet Nam because we won't let politics interfere with tactics and strategy to complete the mission.

Lets see, three questions;

Will it last 10 years without a tactical victory?

Will more soldiers die from booby traps and IED's and accidents than in stand-up gun fights?

Will we protect vast fields of WMD's growing that will kill more people in America in a year than the conflict itself?

yak055h

Made an adjustment for you. Seems that more people are dying from accidents and IEDs than actual fire fights. I remember reading in the MarineTimes that five Army soldiers died in a non-combat accident on five consecutive days, then a day later a sixth dies from an accident. There are WAYheyhey too many problems over there for people to be getting killed by accidents. We need all the good men and women we can get to hold out until someone pulls their head out of their ass and pulls us out. Until then, I guess, we should focus on kicking ass and taking names. That's about all we can do.

reply to post by Echo3Foxtrot


Made an adjustment for you. Seems that more people are dying from accidents and IEDs than actual fire fights. I remember reading in the MarineTimes that five Army soldiers died in a non-combat accident on five consecutive days, then a day later a sixth dies from an accident. There are WAYheyhey too many problems over there for people to be getting killed by accidents. We need all the good men and women we can get to hold out until someone pulls their head out of their ass and pulls us out. Until then, I guess, we should focus on kicking ass and taking names. That's about all we can do.

*************************************************

Thanks for the help. I'm a vet, conservative hawk and pro-military. My issue is that our gub'ment has the Barney Fife Syndrome, i.e. no rounds in the pistol and one bullet in the buttoned shirt pocket. Our enemy's arm themselves with money gained from poppy fields and we don't eradicate the fields because we don't want to piss off the farmers. The heroin from those poppies have probably killed more people here than have died in the war. Why is our crowed dispersing weapon (heat ray) not deployed? I support our troops who are fighting and dying for their fellow soldiers to the right and left of them. I do question our doctrine of not giving them the tools kick ass and take names for total and quick victory.

I don't consider myself a "protester". I am a person who wants the "political considerations" removed from our doctrine and let Barney load his weapon.

yak055h

I have been asking the same thing about the anti-war movement in my land, sudenly i do not hear anyone say anything about America anymore after that anti-white racist obama got into the white house.

reply to post by David9176


Its funny that you bring this up. My friend and I were just chatting about this the other day. I live in SE Washington, near McCord AFB and Ft. Lewis. Ft. Lewis is where the striker battalions are based out of and so we have had more than our share of military deaths and injurys here. You can go out just about any day and see a young man with an artificial limb.

Back when Bush was in office, you could see the anti-war folks all the time. On street corners, banners hanging on overpasses and even a few times where they blocked the tracks on the Port of Tacoma to prevent arms from being delivered to the bases. The latter made national news.

No more. Where I used to see these folks every day now I can't remember the last time I saw one. Surprising given the fact that Obama doubled down the bet in Afganistan.

Some folks have mentioned that the MSM is simply not covering it. While that might be true in some parts of the country, out here, where it was very active, its just gone

agreed with everything you said .... its all the americans fault ... people just arent smart enough to realize what they are doing by supporting the war, they are as guilty as leaders that approved these "wars"

we need to remember that these countries dont have an army, u guys are doing war against civilians ... so, congratulations

reply to post by dolphinfan


What gets me is that the anti-deficit spending movement should be going hand in hand with the anti-war movement.

We simply cannot stop digging ourselves into a whole with a war that many think will last at least another decade...not that we will ever actually "leave" in the first place.

The GOP is raging mad about spending yet they have no problem whatsoever approving 700 billion dollar war bills that Obama quietly signs.

In the beginning, I supported our going into Afghanistan to retaliate against Al Qaeda. They had, after all, attacked us on our own soil and would probably have grown more aggressive if we did not fight back.

I never could understand why were were in Iraq, other than possibly interest in their oil.

I think now we should withdraw from Afghanistan, as we are getting mired in a situation similar to the one that defeated Russia, which spent many years and much money there before they just gave up. It's a no-win situation for us now.

I am not anti-war, as I believe we as a nation still need a military. It's just how that military is used.

We are drawing down our troops in Iraq and Obama promises a withdrawal from Afghanistan eventually (who knows how long that will turn out to be). There may be strategic military reasons for a gradual withdrawal that I don't know about, but I think the sooner the better.

If there were an anti-war movement now I would support it. I know there are many people who are tired of these wars as I am.

reply to post by David9176


To add fuel to your fire you need to consider other "war" spending that is essentially off the books:

Foreign aid to countries for explicit pay to play in the military. In some of these cases we are essentially financing other countries military operations.

Intelligence apparatus that has been created and supports no US interest, but rather those of other countries. CIA and NSA are black boxes

Free military supplies, inclusive of weapons given to foreign firms which is often categorized as financial/economic assistance or in-kind support. That is justified as giving a country something they otherwise would have to build themselves and by so giving it to them enables them to focus their economic resources elsewhere. In many cases these economic resources are then focused on products and services that directly compete with US products

Subsidies for US generated product. Again a pay to play model to solicit a military stance or support like using air space or national waters. Cheap agricultural products are the largest of these. That is categorized as food assistance.

Point being is that what they tell you they are spending on these two and other war efforts is far smaller than the actual dollars we spend to support these wars.

All that and where I live I see just about every day military families using food stamps to buy food and see the beaten down trailers and gang infested apartments they are forced to live in because there is insufficient base housing.

The outrage continues

Gone? If the war stops, the economy crashes. Until the economy is back up, there is no way that war is going to be over.