Mark this day on your calendar Topic

MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Posted by burnsy483 on 11/15/2013 10:10:00 AM (view original):
I'm using common sense.  It doesn't make sense to kill someone who has little to no threat to harming your country if it's going to cost you 5000 lives.
I'm not diminishing the death of a single soldier but they made a committment to our country that you and I are unwilling to make.   They die in nightclub bombings overseas.    Should we not have soldiers in "friendly" countries?
11/15/2013 10:13 AM
burnsy483
Posts: 6848 (0)
Veteran
1 1 26
Prospect
A) Remember that the vast majority of American deaths in Iraq took place after Saddam was captured.

B) Just because someone decides that they're going to be a soldier doesn't mean that it's irrelevant where they go and what they do, since they could just die anywhere they go.  I'd rather keep people as safe as possible, including soldiers, then to take out dictators when it's unnecessary and costing lives. 
11/15/2013 10:24 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect

A) Irrelevant.  When you take out a dictator, you can't just leave.   I had a lot more problems with our exit plan, which apparently didn't exist, than our initial involvement.

B) When you sign up, you say "I'll do as I'm told."   Plain and simple.   If you want to keep them as safe as possible, keep them in America.  Behind big walls with no guns inside because, as you know, military bases aren't the safest places on earth.

11/15/2013 10:27 AM
burnsy483
Posts: 6848 (0)
Veteran
1 1 26
Prospect
Your response to me saying  that it doesn't make sense to have 5000 soldiers die to take out a relatively harmless (to our country) dictator was "i'd rather kill him with a sniper"  The deaths are there regardless of how you capture/kill him.

I understand you need a US presence throughout the world, in many different countries.  I would argue it's not "possible" to keep all soldiers in the US.

 
11/15/2013 10:31 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
How are the death there regardless?   Did 5000 die when Obama singlehandedly killed bin Laden with a kitchen knife?  
11/15/2013 10:39 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
What I'm saying, as it's obvious with Syria and NKorea, that we can turn a blind eye when dictators are abusing their people.   We COULD, except for that policy issue, have taken out SH with a sniper(or drone) and let nature take it's course.   We tried to rebuild a nation. 
11/15/2013 10:46 AM
burnsy483
Posts: 6848 (0)
Veteran
1 1 26
Prospect
I'm confused by the question.  Isn't that like asking "did 5000 die the day we captured SH?"  And again, the vast majority of soldiers died after he was captured.

And no, it looks like about 2000 American soldiers died in Afghanistan.

 
11/15/2013 10:47 AM
burnsy483
Posts: 6848 (0)
Veteran
1 1 26
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/15/2013 10:46:00 AM (view original):
What I'm saying, as it's obvious with Syria and NKorea, that we can turn a blind eye when dictators are abusing their people.   We COULD, except for that policy issue, have taken out SH with a sniper(or drone) and let nature take it's course.   We tried to rebuild a nation. 
Yes, I understand the process of taking down SH meant that we also had to build the nation back up.  I don't think it was worth losing 5000 American soldiers.
11/15/2013 10:48 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect

It's pretty obvious that you're confused.

1.  Saddam.   No invasion.   A simple find and shoot with a sniper.   Two people.
2.  bin Laden.   No invasion.  A simple find and shoot with Seal Team 6.   A couple of squads.

11/15/2013 10:50 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Posted by burnsy483 on 11/15/2013 10:48:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/15/2013 10:46:00 AM (view original):
What I'm saying, as it's obvious with Syria and NKorea, that we can turn a blind eye when dictators are abusing their people.   We COULD, except for that policy issue, have taken out SH with a sniper(or drone) and let nature take it's course.   We tried to rebuild a nation. 
Yes, I understand the process of taking down SH meant that we also had to build the nation back up.  I don't think it was worth losing 5000 American soldiers.
The more qualified people who make those decisions did. 

Do you agree that the world is a better place without SH and his sons?
11/15/2013 10:51 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Anyway, this got off-topic quick.   That's on me as I mentioned Dubya.

We should be celebrating our President finally taking responsibility for a bad decision and admitting he wasn't exacly honest with the public.
11/15/2013 10:55 AM
burnsy483
Posts: 6848 (0)
Veteran
1 1 26
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/15/2013 10:50:00 AM (view original):

It's pretty obvious that you're confused.

1.  Saddam.   No invasion.   A simple find and shoot with a sniper.   Two people.
2.  bin Laden.   No invasion.  A simple find and shoot with Seal Team 6.   A couple of squads.

How did 2000+ Americans die in Afghanistan? 
11/15/2013 10:55 AM
burnsy483
Posts: 6848 (0)
Veteran
1 1 26
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/15/2013 10:51:00 AM (view original):
Posted by burnsy483 on 11/15/2013 10:48:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/15/2013 10:46:00 AM (view original):
What I'm saying, as it's obvious with Syria and NKorea, that we can turn a blind eye when dictators are abusing their people.   We COULD, except for that policy issue, have taken out SH with a sniper(or drone) and let nature take it's course.   We tried to rebuild a nation. 
Yes, I understand the process of taking down SH meant that we also had to build the nation back up.  I don't think it was worth losing 5000 American soldiers.
The more qualified people who make those decisions did. 

Do you agree that the world is a better place without SH and his sons?
Yes, obviously.  And now we could get into "does the US have a responsibility to police the world" which is a different debate.  I'd say yes, in the right circumstances.  I don't think this was.
11/15/2013 10:57 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Posted by burnsy483 on 11/15/2013 10:56:00 AM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/15/2013 10:50:00 AM (view original):

It's pretty obvious that you're confused.

1.  Saddam.   No invasion.   A simple find and shoot with a sniper.   Two people.
2.  bin Laden.   No invasion.  A simple find and shoot with Seal Team 6.   A couple of squads.

How did 2000+ Americans die in Afghanistan? 
They were obviously sent there.    Don't do that.   

Do what was done with ST6.
11/15/2013 10:58 AM
burnsy483
Posts: 6848 (0)
Veteran
1 1 26
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 11/15/2013 10:55:00 AM (view original):
Anyway, this got off-topic quick.   That's on me as I mentioned Dubya.

We should be celebrating our President finally taking responsibility for a bad decision and admitting he wasn't exacly honest with the public.
Yes, you compared this law with a decision to go to war.
11/15/2013 10:58 AM
◂ Prev 123456 Next ▸
Mark this day on your calendar Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.