JavaScript is required to use Bungie.net

OffTopic

Surf a Flood of random discussion.
5/16/2012 4:59:14 AM
171

Is the US military overrated?

People say the US has the strongest military force on the planet. But is this true? There are plenty of other countries who make billions each year and have high populations. So is it really as powerful as its made out to be? Could you US take over the world if they wanted too? Please note, I am an American. I was just curious if it really is that powerful.
English
#Offtopic #Flood

Posting in language:

 

Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

View Entire Topic
  • [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] RC 1207 Sev It's a good thing we did cause there were fighters there who just wanted to kill a whole lot of people and honestly, I'd rather have them focus on our troops than just indiscriminately killing the locals for sport.[/quote] But then you have to redefine the goals and, therefore, what "success" means. The guy I first quoted defined success as "taking down Saddam". Which is fine. But what about all of the other stuff that happened afterwards? For example, the number of people who actually wanted to kill others was [i]relatively[/i] low, compared to how the insurgency was at its peak. Obviously, you've got terrorist organizations trying to gain a foothold, and warring factions within the nation itself. But we [i]created[/i] the insurgency in Iraq that gave us so much trouble. That's an example of what I mean with rebuilding. If we're going to define success not just as toppling the regime but also as rebuilding the nation, then it's not as easy to call it a success. We completely mishandled the early stages of rebuilding. We denied the Iraqi army their jobs and pissed them off-- they went on to form what we know as the insurgency. We threw out everyone who had anything to do with Saddam-- including the people who could have helped us stabilize the country and unite warring factions. We failed to protect the infrastructure in any way, leading to mass looting and deep mistrust among civilians. The government agency we formed to chart a strategy for Iraq was [i]not[/i] full of foreign service officers and agents who had spent decades in the region and developed strong connections and cultural knowledge; instead, it was full of members handpicked by a conservative thinktank based on how much they supported the Bush administration. These were nothing short of colossal failures. They prolonged the war and let to many more civilian and coalition casualties. Did it all work out in the end? Maybe. But how much of a success is unnecessary casualties, spent time, and diverted resources? [quote]Also, I'm enjoying our discussion. =) I've gotten into so many pissing matches over this that it's nice to have a genuine conversation with a level headed individual. =) [/quote] Yeah, I know what you mean lol. [Edited on 05.16.2012 12:14 PM PDT]

    Posting in language:

     

    Play nice. Take a minute to review our Code of Conduct before submitting your post. Cancel Edit Create Fireteam Post

You are not allowed to view this content.
;
preload icon
preload icon
preload icon