Originally posted by hardwoodman
I kind of like the fact that we have bases on both sides of Iran. And we are only spending 3 % of gnp as apposed to 7% in WWII and we actually lost more men on iwo jima in 2 weeks than weve lost in this whole war. But, you can always sit back and pick apart anything without offering a better solution. Of course I'm sure you believe that we can "talk" these assholes into not hating us for the freedom that we all hold so dear. And appease them into leaving us alone.
But of course shooting them is helping, seeing as Terrorism is only the rise and America is hated more now then ever before.... So war is obviously the right thing to do here....
just as a matter of curiosity...how much more is the war costing compared with peace time
you would think that the planes flying and dropping bombs during the war would be practicing flying and dropping bombs during peace...and that the soldiers would be practicing live firing and all the other sections of the military would be training...at the cost of billions of dollars anyway
^ No, the cost would most definitely not be the same.
Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
Actually, what the passage of this bill indicates is the apathy for governing that is common practice for every member of the governing body, be they democrat or republican.
Congrats to you for taking the time to actually read and comprehend the article while keeping yourself objective and not missing the actual point.
^ No, the cost would most definitely not be the same.
i'm mot saying it would...but the 70billion being spent on the troops and war effort in Iraq and Afganistan would still be getting spent...there would still be the same number of troops getting paid...and not far off the same number of munitions being used...given that the miltary operations aren't as full scale as they were at the beginning of the war
Originally posted by hardwoodman
I kind of like the fact that we have bases on both sides of Iran. And we are only spending 3 % of gnp as apposed to 7% in WWII and we actually lost more men on iwo jima in 2 weeks than weve lost in this whole war. But, you can always sit back and pick apart anything without offering a better solution. Of course I'm sure you believe that we can "talk" these assholes into not hating us for the freedom that we all hold so dear. And appease them into leaving us alone.
Just as I said in another thread, that is the true purpose of the war in Iraq:
To give us a friendly ally in that part of the world, along with Israel, to fight radical Islamic states.
Good job WHOB, you win the thread! 👆
Originally posted by sithsaber408
Just as I said in another thread, that is the true purpose of the war in Iraq:To give us a friendly ally in that part of the world, along with Israel, to fight radical Islamic states.
Good job WHOB, you win the thread! 👆
So its purpose is to put puppet states and use them to invade countries which haven't done anything to us?
Originally posted by Darth Kreiger
Common mistake, but we declared war on them
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WW2#War_becomes_global:_1941
LEARN.
Originally posted by RocasAtoll
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WW2#War_becomes_global:_1941LEARN.
Despite using that as a source myself, it is an error, Germany didn't Officially Declare War, we did
Originally posted by Darth Kreiger
Despite using that as a source myself, it is an error, Germany didn't Officially Declare War, we did
ARE YOU FVCKING SERIOUS!?!?!
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/wwii/gerdec41.htm
Yale says I'm right.
http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/germany-declares.htm
Historians agree with me.
Where's your proof?