How comes America seems unable to win any war since WW2 ?

MCE

We worry about hurting the innocent, War is War you go in and do what is needed, Right now we go in an do little, and if you kill someone on video you will be thrown in jail. The politicians should stay out, the media should stay out, and you give the military the task and let them do it, and they will, and we will win, fast and easy.

copper_head1969

two words.....geneva convention.....we are the only sissys who fallow the rules and nobody else does......if we could do what we wanted to war would be over in a month with ease

Joe C

In WW2 it was understood that the cause was just, we were unified in spirit and it was all out war and winning was necessary.

There was not political correctness and there was no traitorous, anti-American media.

ryan b

Depends what you consider winning, in Vietnam 50,000 Americans died.
While over 2 Million Vietnimese died.

Same with every other war.

5,000 Us deaths in Iraq, and over a million Iraqis dead.

Hope

Our politics, rules and regulations "tie up" the hands of our military. In my opinion, we would not have won anything if we had always fought this way.

Also, In WW2, we were fighting governments. In Iraq we are fighting insurgents.

Just my humble opinion. I hate war, wish it wasn't necessary.

Derick

Well, regarding Iraq.
The United States one the war when they defeated the Iraqi Army. In this current business, there's no enemy army just a bunch of rebelious civilians with black market weapons.

Military cops in a land full of angry zealots is probably a war that can't really be one.

But we still do it better than anyone else could.

Here's Tommy! AM

1 million Iraqis dead isnt something to boast about, nor is 2 million Vietnamese

Alpha Male

It's interesting that the last time a President kicked the media out was WW2, isn't it?

hemihead_38

America prevents America from winning. Too many bleeding hearts.

GunnyC

America has not had the political will to win a war. Grenada was a success in that the mission was accomplished but it was an operation as was Panama. The longer lasting conflicts have been hampered, as is Iraq, with a lack of political backing and public backing. America is not an "imperial" super power; most Americans don't care about world events and are fairly isolationist in there outlook of the world. They think back and believe America can survive all on it's own and we really don't need the hassle of being a world super power. Unfortunately that is not true but most people don't want to believe it. We depend on the world for much of our raw materials and many to a greater degree then oil.

gremlingts

I agree with Copperhead - we are following the "rules" , even though insurgents don't, they behead civilians and soldiers alike, isn't THAT against the Geneva Conventions? Do you hear a peep out of the bloody Euro-citizens, or anyone, about that? No, even though many of the insurgents aren't even CITIZENS of Iraq, Liberal peaceniks everywhere whine that the USA invaded, and they have "rights" to fight back - RIGHTS? For non-indigenous skirt-hiders? Gimme a break. American beat Iraq's army twice, that is correct, but we are not clear winners against a long-term guerilla warfare action supported by outsiders. Regular military can't compare to that. We're in a political war now, and we need to start winning the hearts and minds of Iraqis, not with guns, but with information, civil service actions like restoring well water, transportation, electrical service, etc. Change the tactics , change the outcome. Maybe we should be stationing troops on Iran's border, and try to keep the supplies from coming in.
Most modern wars are now so heavily political in nature, that it is hard to win them without popular support. So should we have even tried to change Iraq? I don't know. Saddam defied 17 UN resolutions, and at the time we thought he might be doing even worse things. So it's a gut call.
All I can say in the end is, if the Euro countries get overrun by the Islamist horde, that we "turn the other cheek". We've learned our lesson at their hands not to interfere in Islamist countries, so if theirs is going that way, we should leave well enough alone. Let them sort out their OWN problems.
- The Gremlin Guy -

JT B ford man

Unless you are a combat veteran and have slept in rain, hiked all day in 120 degrees heat When you come to a village where the kids only know you for food and candy that is sad , and when your friend is laying on an LZ half a day then you fill your glass and drink to the ones that came back in body bags, Also If we stop sending in troops then the ones that are there are really vonerable, USMC 1966-1971

cndtroops1

Your definition of history is not complete, Korea was neither a win nor a loss, more a draw actually a win because we ended up pushing the communists back to were the line originally was, both iraqs were clear and decisive wins, how about all the peacekeeping operations in bosnia, or africa that worked against hostile threats. Both wars in Iraq we destroyed there armies and now we arent fighting iraqs army we are fighting insurgents who have infiltraded the country and these type of wars will have to be maintained for years after years. Military might will not beat the kind of enemy that lurks in iraq or vietnam. These are wars of attrition. And yes anyone who says vietnam was a win is not of sound mind, not only did america lose 50000 people but vietnam was nearly destroyed in the process. They didnt win anything either out of the whole thing, everyone got screwed in that deal.

Sykopup

The problem is that the liberals in Congress won't provide the American soldier the support he or she needs.

And to "impeach bush"--I would put money on the most tired of even our female soldiers being able to kick your sorry behind around the yard for the better part of a day.

Ben

Because in WW2 we (the Allies, not America) were fighting for our lives, now we just fight for other peoples lives but in doing so we destroy their country, their livelihood and their short term future in the process so they hate us, the media hates us, pretty much everyone just ends up hating everyone and you have to pull out before you lose the next election.

vammeejdeploy

Truthfully it is the politician who knows nothing of war, and yet insists on running things from WA.

Drake Deth

Read vammeejdeploy's Answer it seems right on

John himself

There is much more money to be made by waging a war than by winning one. And our government is owned by corporations making the money.

PRC47 GRUNT

As a Nam Vet my only answer is :
"Brave Warriors.....Gutless Politicians!"

Streakin' Deacon

Thats easy.Because the self important politicians began running the wars aided by a bias liberal media who thinks more of the the enemy than our own brave troops.Our military leaders have been pushed aside in favor of political polls and political correctness.Our military can kick anyones *** if allowed to do what they are trained for.GOD BLESS AMERICA!

nigelshiftright

Wars have become much more political. The American people have not really gotten totally behind any war the US has fought since then, and so, with this political dilemma facing America's leaders, they have had to be very careful as to how they act.

Also, due to very poor judgment and even worse leadership, just about every one of our Presidents except Clinton I think got us into an unnecessary useless war.

In my opinion, the only "wars" that were worth spilling any American blood whatsoever were a) bombing the Yugoslav army into armistice, and b) Afghanistan right after 9-11. The rest of the wars were either follies we committed, like Vietnam, or follies of our own neglect, like Korea (with help from the other fools in Russia and China).

Korea and Vietnam should have been resolved right after WWII by diplomacy IMO. Cuba should have been left alone after Russia stood down on missiles. Grenada was a joke. Carter was a fool to plan an incursion into Iran; Iraq is a total disaster for us.

As for "winning" as a former soldier (non-combatant) I can tell you that when it's you that is killed, the casualty rate for you and your family is 100%.

chrispkreme333

Cuba? We beat Iraq the first time. WE beat the crap out of Libya after Lockerbie.

keny

America won WW2 ? The last i heard that was Russia

zionsdaughter

It's not about winning.Keeping the arms dealers,military branches,federal government and special interest groups rolling in blood soaked loot is the REAL name of the game.Why do we give a flying fart about "Iraq's wellbeing "when there are plenty of oppressed third world countries to deal with?Here's a secret;it's not the terrorists-it's the oil AND an excuse to wage war(which is always profitable for the above mentioned).Just my perspective...hope the gestafo doesn't take me away.

impeach bush

America didn't even win that, it is complete propoganda to suggest that you had any significant part in victory in Europe.

It may also have something to do witht he fact that your soldiers are so ******* stupid, inexperienced or tired when they get out there that they couln't fight their way out of a paper bag.

Kirk Neel

there heart is not in it......

Michael H

So true, America will only be superpower for a little while longer. I think they are really losing it. Economy in tatters and the rest of the world has turned on them.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: