[dabibibff]

What do you all think should be done with the military?

[BloofPailafum]

They should come home from Iraq and we should work closely with other countries to take out the terrorists that are hiding all over the world.

[Lhtfajba]

The days of massive armies are over. Its all about technology when it comes to winning battles. Specialized assault units and fast attack groups could do a vast majority of the jobs that are needed to be done.

[Podosinovik]

They should come home from Iraq and we should work closely with other countries to take out the terrorists that are hiding all over the world.

Sure, why not, just quit when they're winning this war. Show the world that the U.S. has no backbone when it comes to disarming dangerous dictators.

[nvmrfgopyy]

I think military spending is spinning out of control. We're trying to police the world, which I fear is bankrupting our country. We seem to bounce from one conflict to another. Our problem seems to be trying to shove democracy down the throat of every country in the world. We haven't perfected the our own form of government, yet we want everyone to embrace our system.

I think our country needs to back off and let other nations step up to the plate.

The ME seems to be the hot spot lately.The US seems to be on track to end up in a dispute with Iran, while fighting a war on 2 other fronts. We seem to be strong-arming the whole region.

We need to concentrate on domestic problems more. Our failed policys are dooming us to armed conflicts.

[18holesin]

They should come home from Iraq and we should work closely with other countries to take out the terrorists that are hiding all over the world.

I agree with the second part of your sentence. However, the first part would just cause Iraq to fall in the terrorists hands. Making them a stronger opponent in the long run.

[Konidurase]

The days of massive armies are over. Its all about technology when it comes to winning battles. Specialized assault units and fast attack groups could do a vast majority of the jobs that are needed to be done.

Agreed, which is why I voted to increase spending.

[casinochniks]

Leave, and leave now. Just declare victory and leave. I used to think that we "owed it" to the Iraqi people to make sure we leave behind a free and stable government, but now I think that for democracy to work in Iraq, the U.S. needs to withdraw. How can a democracy get started under an occupation? Most Iraqi citizens don't want us there any longer. Let them run their own country.

Did we get Saddam? Yes. Did we get the WMD? No, oops, they either didn't exist or they were moved out of the country, depending on who you believe.

Weren't those the two big reasons to go into Iraq in the first place? Bush said it - mission accomplished - let's bring the troops home ... so they can get a brief break before we invade another country.

[KuRoregioNka]

What do you all think should be done with the military?

I think those decisions should be left to those who know more. Namely the politicians and the generals. However, my personal limited informed opinion is that we need to maintain the superiority of power, which allows us to exert political influence around the world, and sometimes to intervene. The spread of WMD and terrorism is the current largest threat and will need to be dealt with militarily in some cases. And dont count out China.

[PriernPayorse]

I think military spending is spinning out of control. We're trying to police the world, which I fear is bankrupting our country. not sure if you're completely, or just partially wrong. Military spending is certainly high. Not sure if that's Too high or not. But that's not what's bankrupting our country.

We need to concentrate on domestic problems more. That's what's bankrupting our country. Basic macroeconomics states that if you tax something you get less of it, and if you subsidize something, you get more of it. We tax savings and investment, and subsidize indolence and illegitimacy. And most people who say we aren't doing things right erroneously claim the problem is we're not doing it Enough.

Anyway, I didn't vote, since I haven't done proper analysis to select from Decrease, Maintain, or Increase, tho I'm leaning towards Decrease.

[ddxbovMQ]

We need to ensure our Military has the latest and greatest equipment, they are the ones on the front lines fighting and dying for us, wether you agree with them, or the policies or not, they ARE out there for us.

The more advanced weapons systems we have, the less danger our military will have to face which will save lives and money in the long run.

I agree we need to quit being the world's pollice force and concentrate on what IS a threat to us.

[gopsbousperie]

Sure, why not, just quit when they're winning this war. Show the world that the U.S. has no backbone when it comes to disarming dangerous dictators.

Sir, or maam, You have a very very odd definition of winning.

[weaddercaps]

I agree with the second part of your sentence. However, the first part would just cause Iraq to fall in the terrorists hands. Making them a stronger opponent in the long run.

It's already in the hands of the terrorists,as much as the cities of the US are under the control of gangs. would you suggest we just keep the military there as a police force for the next 50 or so years?

[Bemapayople]

I think those decisions should be left to those who know more. Namely the politicians and the generals. However, my personal limited informed opinion is that we need to maintain the superiority of power, which allows us to exert political influence around the world, and sometimes to intervene. The spread of WMD and terrorism is the current largest threat and will need to be dealt with militarily in some cases. And dont count out China.

So far, the best written statement I've seen here yet.

Rather than try to top it, I'll just say I agree exactly.

I couldn't possibly have said it better.

[Usogwdkb]

Sir, or maam, You have a very very odd definition of winning.

Oh, ok, so actually winning the battles, losing very minimal troops, and overthrowing the murderous dictator while protecting us from more terror attacks is not winning? Please tell me what winning is

This should be good

Todd

[massons]

Sure, why not, just quit when they're winning this war. Show the world that the U.S. has no backbone when it comes to disarming dangerous dictators.

HAHAHAHAHhahahahaa!!!
Way out there, lad!
How about showing some backbone, and recall all U.S. troops home. From all over the world. Defend your own land and stay there!

You would be surprised to see how much less that would cost.

You can't hunt terrorists. You cannot conquer their lands and destroy their economy with embargoes and bombs. They spawn where you make wrong.

[mashabox]

They should come home from Iraq and we should work closely with other countries to take out the terrorists that are hiding all over the world.

Whether you agree or not that we should of started this war or not, I don't think we can leave. Look what happened when we left Vietnam, the country became exactly what we feared and all those soliders died in vain. If they came home now, the terrorist would declare victory first, not us (Which would give them the nerve and idea that we are entirely beatable now). While at the same time, I don't agree we can fight this war all by ourselves. We need to seek support from the world, and truely make the war on terror a war on the ideology of extreamist.
How do you do that? You convince the world you are the good guys, the leaders of freedom. You do this by not calling everybody evil, and generally practicing what you preach. America as yet, has a image problem in which we aren't clearly the good guys (You know, from the questionable stuff we've done). We can win this war, but not on our own, after all we have other enemies to think about and who exactly has our back (Basicly we need the support of the world to prove that we truely encourage freedom, and thus make the idea of terrorism not only evil but absurb).

[oronozopiy]

If war breaks out against Iran then I think the draft will follow shortly.
Just as it is in the case of taxes, the American people will have no say in the matter and the young will head off to be ground up as cannon fodder.
Americans will die and be crippled not to defend America, but to defend other peoples and other lands. As usual.

[KasaBalak]

Oh, ok, so actually winning the battles, losing very minimal troops, and overthrowing the murderous dictator while protecting us from more terror attacks is not winning? Please tell me what winning is

This should be good

Todd

1.We won the battles over two years ago.
2. all troops lost since then has been lost for nothing.
3. see number one, plus what is protecting us (the US) from terrirst attacks in ANY way connected to Iraq? ----Which of course has not happened???

[AngelBee]

Well Doniston it's like this:
I don't think I put much stock in your military analysis.
It does not matter anyway. We are in the Middle East until the oil runs out.
Once we take over Iran and Israel wipes out Syria, the insurgency problem will probably disappear.
Not that it matters. We will be in the Middle East until the oil runs out or somebody comes up with a way to produce electricity with fusion power.