Question:
Can you tell me the definition of "WAR"?
anonymous
2009-09-28 12:33:43 UTC
I am no Yale Scholar, but I was under the impression that the word "war" means to engage an enemy WITH THE INTENTION of winning. I thought the goal in war is to WIN IT. I thought these things UNTIL I heard General McCrystal speak yesterday.
He sent a letter to our troops in battle in Afganistan that overseeing the safety and security of Afgan citizens IS NOW THE MOST IMPORTANT GOAL IN OUR PRESENCE THERE - our mission is no longer to kill the enemy who attacked us, but rather to keep civilians safe.

AND he says that THIS GOAL is to be reached even if it means taking risks on our own troops to do it.....WHAT??

Why don't we just show up with tea and biscuits? This Administration is making America look like a bunch of wimp puss's with no backbone, no conviction, no character, no integrety, not even the sense to know how to defend ourselves. We've become a joke and a mockery. Some say we aren't even smart enough to dump water out of a boot. THATS NOT WHO WE ARE. THIS IS NOT THE CHANGE ANYBODY WANTED ON NOV 4.

Is our presence in Afganistan changing from war, which is our intent to go over there and kill an enemy - to nothing more than a peacekeeping mission?

Can somebody explain to me what the definition of war is?
Can anybody give me one good reason why it would be better for America to have the world believe we are spineless cowards who would rather kiss a few butts than fight in our own defense?

If we had a Commander in Chief actually had five minutes of experience before being put into the Oval Office, HE WOULD UNDERSTAND that the enemy dress and act and ARE civilians....civilians with guns who are blowing away our brothers and fathers and sons, while we try to think up new ways to appease and flatter them.
Seven answers:
anonymous
2009-09-28 12:39:08 UTC
War = Shoot until all of the other bastards are dead or have surrendered.
heichel
2016-09-18 10:31:52 UTC
There is not just something you must do to be a "precise Christian." It is a under no circumstances finishing approach, this can be a existence variety. It does begin with asking Jesus into your middle, however it's so a lot more then that. If that is all it was once, such a lot of humans could be Christians since of ways handy it's. Even the Bible says that being a Christian is difficult, and that there might be struggles. Anyways, ethical of the tale, simply accepting Jesus is not the one factor you must do, it is only the begin.
?
2009-09-28 12:56:39 UTC
I agree that the President should have some military time. I always thought that the President should be a 4 star general. But that is the beauty of the USA. I can think for myself, I can talk about my country as I choose, I can say what I think is right and what is wrong. It does not matter who is in the Oval office, or who is spitting at the feet of a soldier. I will love my country till the day I die, I would rather die at the end of the enemies smoking barrel then to die in a car with a McDonald's drink spilled onto my lap and the rests of my McChicken sandwich smashed into my face sporting a ( Why are soldiers so lame ) sticker on my bumper.



You are not wrong. We are entitled to our opinions, but the tears that my soldiers shed will not be in vein. We fight for your freedom as we fight for the freedom of the boy and girls that lost there parents in war/9-11 or any other sad tribute.



We are but the little men, but we are a band. We stand when you cannot. I just pray that you you stand when I cannot. If not I know I can look to my soldiers to protect me. I hope your dream of peace comes true, but till then I will stand here in front of you, and beside the soldiers.
Si
2009-09-28 12:56:18 UTC
Well, according to famed military theorist Carl von Clausewitz, war is an extension of policy, which means that the goal of war is not merely indiscriminate slaughter, but to achieve some political objective, else we wouldn't be at war. If the political objective in this case is to prevent the growth of terrorism, establish a secure democracy and limit insurgency, then mass killing may not be the best method.
Chris
2009-09-28 12:43:55 UTC
You don't want the civilian populace to get hurt, or else they'll turn against you and you will lose the war. But then again, if a civilian has to die in order to protect our troops; so be it.
Pres. Sen. Pis. Chief C. Wiener N.C. B.S. P.H.O.L.
2009-09-28 12:46:13 UTC
OK.



You win. <----(This is sarcasm do not actually do it !)



Kill everyone who you even think have killed US troops. After all, why not you've perfect understanding of the risks, right? Bullets in your mind are dangerous, and you know that in your heart nuclear bombs will never "take out" 10 million Americans in one afternoon. <----(This is sarcasm do not actually do it !)





Because, hey, why would they? They can shoot us any time they want.<----(This is sarcasm do not actually do it !)





Oh, wait, that's right. THEY DO. But though they don't use their bombs on New York, they do use their guns in Afghanistan.<----(This is sarcasm do not actually do it !)





So we should make them use those bombs THAT many MUSLIMs HAVE. Out of fear and loathing of us? Is that your humble opinion?<----(This is sarcasm do not actually do it !)
anonymous
2009-09-28 13:48:55 UTC
You are right - you are no Yale scholar. War is defined as armed conflict between two opposing sides.


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...