Iraq=Vietnam
Out of context: Reply #15
- Started
- Last post
- 18 Responses
- unknown0
People don't seem to be able to handle our soldiers being gone long term anymore. They want the Desert Storm scheme of leave quickly/get back quickly, we don't care if the problem was solved or not (which it wasn't, obviously) just bring our men and women back fast.
I'm am not for any American lives being lost in battle. But I totally respect a soldier's choice in doing what they do, and I do so knowing that they know they could lose their life. That is quite a brave thing, whether the politics of what's going on are right or wrong, that hundereds of thousands of troops are willing to put themselves in that position. They make that decision the day they sign up knowing the consequences.
No life is any less than any other. I know we're not in the times of WWII or Vietnam, but look how many died in those wars.
WWII-405,399
Vietnam/SE Asia-58,167
http://www.teachervision.com/les…I think what obviously makes the difference is the availability of information. When a single soldier dies now, it's on CNN and every other news channel and web site within 12 hours.
WWII, Vietnam, 100 soldiers would die and it would be days if not weeks before the world outside the area of conflict found out, families, etc.
I just think people lose sight of the fact that the soldiers do what they do fully knowing the risks. Iraq isn't yet to a "How do we get out of this?" state that Vietnam was for years, bit it isn't a cakewalk either.