KaMiKaZe said:
If politicians and bleeding heart citizens didn’t handicap the soldiers we currently have fighting the whole thing could have been done with already. When we fought in WW2 we were a far more effective force due to the fact that the military was in charge of guess what the military. I know this is a novel idea but I think we should go back to it as it got results. Bleeding heart pacifists go ohh no we can’t have our soldiers blowing up that hospital or ohh no we can’t blow up that school where will the people go. Well if their armies want to hide weapons in it and fill it with people so that we won’t bomb it, they effectively take out some of our best weapons. World war 2 they have a ball bearing plant in a city lets say hamelburg and we need to knock it out, we wiped out the entire area around it. Collateral damage happens its called war for a reason and people need to realize that and stop hamstringing our military because those same people given the oppurtunity would not return those same courtesies back. They blow a building we blow up a block of buildings, they blow up a block we blow up a town, etc… they have to learn there are consequences and that its futile to engage in the activity. The israelis had it right before they stopped. they shoot a rocket they blew up the street it came from. They mobilize more rockets, israel levels every block they passed on. It may not be very clean or nice but no war is.
Wow, this is truly moronic. So, killing a million Iraqis for NO REASON isn’t good enough for you? Clearly you don’t realize that in this war, there isn’t a steadfast, declared enemy. You can’t win a war against an idea. We’re not at war with Iraq, just “terrorism.” This isn’t a battle to be fought with boundaries and conventional thinking. If we were to nuke middle eastern cities Ala WWII, nothing would change and nothing would be ended. No war would be won and the only thing that would be different is the amount of people who want to see America demolished.