Ingia
August 30, 2015, 5:40pm
21
Jazzman:
America has had to fight wars each decade since the world wars, the human cost of war cannot be put in monetary value. Despite the sweeping reforms passed by Lyndon Johnsons government, he still lost the primaries due to his support for the war in Vietnam, and you know of the casualties. Saddams ouster and Afghanistan are no different, lives were lost, others came back maimed and in a situation where the goals arenât clear, who will support such wars? Setting boots into Syria is a potential powder keg. They are drawing down in Afghanistan and general forces left Iraq, do you think the American public will support putting boots in another nation after the horrors of Iraq/Afghanistan?
Yes they will. Because wars are are a political manipulation tool
Dunya
August 30, 2015, 7:43pm
22
Jazzman:
America has had to fight wars each decade since the world wars, the human cost of war cannot be put in monetary value. Despite the sweeping reforms passed by Lyndon Johnsons government, he still lost the primaries due to his support for the war in Vietnam, and you know of the casualties. Saddams ouster and Afghanistan are no different, lives were lost, others came back maimed and in a situation where the goals arenât clear, who will support such wars? Setting boots into Syria is a potential powder keg. They are drawing down in Afghanistan and general forces left Iraq, do you think the American public will support putting boots in another nation after the horrors of Iraq/Afghanistan?
My take is they are not putting boots on any ground any time soon. They have lost the confidence they had after the human costs theyâve faced in the recent arab world conflicts despite their technological advancement in comparison to the enemies. They also realised their military is getting stretched thin from multiple fronts and in costs too. In other words wanahema
1 Like
But it wonât be for long once the casualties start piling
1 Like