How about all sending all US soldiers home?

[Aree Wongwanlee]

What does it mean when public opinion is not represented by the government's actions?

That means the public is not getting what it paid for. Let's say you go to the supermarket. You see a bottle labelled as milk. You look at it. It does look like milk. You look at the contents listed on the label. Yes, the contents listed look like milk. So you buy it. When you get home, you find out that you have been sold a bottle of white paint. Don't you get angry? Don't you go back to the supermarket to demand your money back?

Same with the government. Before we elected them, they told us that they are going to represent us. They told us that they are going to act in our best interests. Now, what did they do? Isn't it time to demand that they make good their promises? The promises they made before we gave them our votes?

 

[DeltaForce103]

That means the public is not getting what it paid for. Let's say you go to the supermarket. You see a bottle labelled as milk. You look at it. It does look like milk. You look at the contents listed on the label. Yes, the contents listed look like milk. So you buy it. When you get home, you find out that you have been sold a bottle of white paint. Don't you get angry? Don't you go back to the supermarket to demand your money back?

Same with the government. Before we elected them, they told us that they are going to represent us. They told us that they are going to act in our best interests. Now, what did they do? Isn't it time to demand that they make good their promises? The promises they made before we gave them our votes?

You can't bring about change in the government using the flawed system that's responsible for it. Public demonstrations and protests of the peaceful kind, the sort of mass movement that happened in the '60s with the Vietnam war would be your best bet. At least, that's what most critics seem to advice. We'll have to wait and see if the American population can be mobilized and what will turn out to be the breaking point for them.

 

[musicmonster]

Yes, that's exactly what I mean. Send all the US soldiers home. Withdraw from all the countries they are involved in now. Stop fighting other peeple's wars. Go home. Stay home. Look after their own home.

How about that?

This is a dream we all have in the US. But it looks like war is a real business so the country is still participating in it. I don't want to be labeled as a conspiracy theorist but all those documentaries about it is getting real and real by the minute. Every time some war breaks in and it doesn't matter where it is in the globe, America is there! Like seriously, what's up with that?

 

[Sarz]

I feel that unfortunately that is not something that will be happening anytime soon. I also doubt that anyone will be pushing that campaign come election time. I don't think it matters who is in power they are merely puppets whom all have the same agenda.

 

[downsouth]

Lots of chaos and havoc will ensue and get worse if US soldiers are sent home. ISIS will continue its brutality and more innocent people will die. Many people say the US stick their nose into other countries' business but what choice do we have when genocide or injustice is being committed while the rest of the world watches ?

Although there have been incidents where the US should not have gotten involved also. So I am definitely not saying that every man or woman deployed on foreign soil has been warranted. Lots of corrupt politics in play also.

 

[TatsuKaji]

For the most part it would be nice to pull back a great deal of our boys but in some areas, we're too highly invested in protecting important neighbors. The main thing we need to stop doing, is to stop getting dragged into small scrimmages that last for years on end, either end it quickly or don't get involved.

 

[Aree Wongwanlee]

You can't bring about change in the government using the flawed system that's responsible for it

You have a point there. Perhaps this is the time to test the power of the internet. Let's start a campaign via all the social networks we know of, via the email system, via all the forums that have connections to politics. Let's make videos. Let's write articles. Let's all work together to bring home our soldiers. Too many have died for the benefit of too few. Come home, come back to where you are loved, come home to where you are welcomed, come home.

 

[DeltaForce103]

You have a point there. Perhaps this is the time to test the power of the internet. Let's start a campaign via all the social networks we know of, via the email system, via all the forums that have connections to politics. Let's make videos. Let's write articles. Let's all work together to bring home our soldiers. Too many have died for the benefit of too few. Come home, come back to where you are loved, come home to where you are welcomed, come home.

The movement for radical political and social change is already happening exactly the way you described it, well, sort of. The only problem is that this ragtag group consists of a lot of people with undesirable ideologies. There are fringe groups that are waiting for the "collapse" as they call it. The common theme, however, seems to be dissatisfaction with the economic and social direction that the US is taking.

Whether the internet has just given conspiracy shills and all kinds of extremists a platform, or if these people are growing in numbers is something I can't judge. I hope for the best. What's good for the American public should be good for the rest of the world too.

 

[Peachdejour]

Yes, that's exactly what I mean. Send all the US soldiers home. Withdraw from all the countries they are involved in now. Stop fighting other peeple's wars. Go home. Stay home. Look after their own home.

How about that?

Yes, that would ideally be great. However, we would create a number of problems we are not ready for here at home. We would have a number of career servicemen that suddenly have no employment. We would have a number of veterans depending on an already overloaded medical system and one that needs a complete mental health overhaul. We would need to help thousands of men and women re-assimilate into civilian culture all at once instead of in controlled waves, which is already proving somewhat problematic for our system. We would need to put into place a whole new social welfare net for these soldiers alone, but we can barely stop squabbling over the social nets we provide already.

 

[Aree Wongwanlee]

However, we would create a number of problems we are not ready for here at hom

Agreed. There are tons of problems to be overcome. This will take time, effort and money to solve. However, this will be time, effort and money spent on taking care of our own people, not wasting time, effort and money fighting other peoples' wars. It will be a big task but, hey, if we can spend billions of dollars to help other people, why can't we, for a change, spend all those billions helping our own people?

 

[Peachdejour]

Agreed. There are tons of problems to be overcome. This will take time, effort and money to solve. However, this will be time, effort and money spent on taking care of our own people, not wasting time, effort and money fighting other peoples' wars. It will be a big task but, hey, if we can spend billions of dollars to help other people, why can't we, for a change, spend all those billions helping our own people?

Oh, I fully agree that we should be spending our money on solving our problems here at home. We have plenty of problems we are solving overseas that are masquerading on our own doorsteps. However, I think pulling back all of our soldiers would have to be a multistep operation conducted over many years.

 

[xTinx]

You see, the US is a permanent member of the UN so it feels the need to not only keep up appearances but to fulfill its responsibilities as a top brass of the UN. Unless of course it's acting on behalf of itself instead of through the UN, then those soldiers sent elsewhere in the name of their country should go home. Their lives would just be wasted indeed.

 

[Aree Wongwanlee]

the US is a permanent member of the UN

The US is not the only permanent member of the UN. Do you see any other permanent UN members sending their soldiers to fight other peoples' wars all over the world? The way I see it, what the US has done is not to its own benefit in the long run. It will take time and effort to bring home all the US soldiers but it has to be done. Otherwise, something may happen in the US and those soldiers may not find a home to go back to.

 

[Peachdejour]

The US is not the only permanent member of the UN. Do you see any other permanent UN members sending their soldiers to fight other peoples' wars all over the world? The way I see it, what the US has done is not to its own benefit in the long run. It will take time and effort to bring home all the US soldiers but it has to be done. Otherwise, something may happen in the US and those soldiers may not find a home to go back to.

Oh, you have hit a point I have thought on many times. Why are we the only ones running around putting out fires? All these other countries seem to be able to say no when it comes to their countries best interest. When a problem pops up in the world, the world calls on us, while everyone else sits on their damn hands! Hey China! You are a super power now, can you help put out some fires now too? Our men are tired and would like to spend some time with their children. What about Russia? They want to play war games. Why not help with the war on terror?

 

[diprod]

Also a good question here is, what is America exactly fighting for? It confuses me the need to send troops not knowing what exactly would they want to accomplish here?