Kasz216 said:
disolitude said:
eab said:
Let me just clear something up that most people seem to be confusing.
-Could the U.S. militarily take out Iran? Lol, hell yes.
-Could the U.S. stick around and police Iran like it is doing in Iraq? No. Well maybe but it would bloodier than Vietnam
Critics of the U.S. military see it's failures at policing Iraq and go ahead and say the US military sucks. Oh please, army are made and trained to kill other armies, they are not made to police a terrorist run state.
Critics say Napoleon and Hitler had armies that were more powerful and successful
than the US. I argue this, Hitler could simply carpet bomb entire cities and kill entire civilian populations. The U.S. spends billions and risks its soldiers lives to protect the civilians of enemy nations. Heck half the time an American soldier shoots an enemy and then 10 seconds later runs over and carries him to a hospital. This is a slight exaggeration but you get the point, part of the reason the US gets bogged down in these "policing wars" is because unlike Hitler or any of the large armies of past, the US can't simply kill everyone in the countries it invades... because my god if it was allowed to just kill anyone like the armies of past could (and thank god it can't) the U.S. would rip the Middle East to shreds |
Well sorry, but this sounds like excuses to me... US should have thought of that before they decided they wanted to be a nation that respects freedom and liberty of civilians and doesn't want to harbour killers and baby murderers in its army. Sorry, better luck next time US... |
Are you actually supporting that armies should not respect enemy civilians or do you just dislike America that much that you are seemingly taking that position. I'm hoping it's the latter. |
I was being sarcastic to the idiotic post I quoted.
