Republicans
Republicans
Posted on Feb 27, 2017
What does Trump's stated desire to "Start Winning Wars" to "Make America Great Again" mean to you?
Suspended Profile
59.5K
1.38K
591
In today's speech to the American Governors - Trump offered to provide a 10% increase in the military's budget - but also stated that “We never win wars anymore. We never fight to win. We have to start winning wars again.”
“We have to start winning wars again — when I was young, in high school and college, people used to say we never lost a war. We need to win or don’t fight it all. It’s a mess like you have never seen before.”
What does it mean to fulfill Trump's dream of winning wars mean in terms of the kind of intensive ground and air battle required to defeat and eradicate ISIS? What does it mean for US military personnel to assume the responsibility for and personally "start winning wars" in the Middle East, South China Sea, Eastern Europe, North Korea, etc?
We have tried on many occasions to build coalitions and/or to rely on local indigenous troops to assume responsibility for the defense of our foreign allies. Instead, what does it mean for US Service Men and Service Women to assume responsibility for "winning" - and does that mean for us to invade, hold territory, and loot their oil and other natural resources - as has been repeatedly suggested by Trump on a number of occasions in the past?
Warmest Regards, Sandy :)
n.b. All this from a man who graduated New York Military Academy in 1968 at age 22, 6' 2" tall, the picture of health, had an athletic build, played football, tennis and squash; and was taking up golf. In an interview with The New York Times last month, Mr. Trump said he had bone spurs — a "temporary" and “minor” malady that had no meaningful impact on him. He paid a doctor who to provided a letter for draft officials enabling him to dodge the draft.
“We have to start winning wars again — when I was young, in high school and college, people used to say we never lost a war. We need to win or don’t fight it all. It’s a mess like you have never seen before.”
What does it mean to fulfill Trump's dream of winning wars mean in terms of the kind of intensive ground and air battle required to defeat and eradicate ISIS? What does it mean for US military personnel to assume the responsibility for and personally "start winning wars" in the Middle East, South China Sea, Eastern Europe, North Korea, etc?
We have tried on many occasions to build coalitions and/or to rely on local indigenous troops to assume responsibility for the defense of our foreign allies. Instead, what does it mean for US Service Men and Service Women to assume responsibility for "winning" - and does that mean for us to invade, hold territory, and loot their oil and other natural resources - as has been repeatedly suggested by Trump on a number of occasions in the past?
Warmest Regards, Sandy :)
n.b. All this from a man who graduated New York Military Academy in 1968 at age 22, 6' 2" tall, the picture of health, had an athletic build, played football, tennis and squash; and was taking up golf. In an interview with The New York Times last month, Mr. Trump said he had bone spurs — a "temporary" and “minor” malady that had no meaningful impact on him. He paid a doctor who to provided a letter for draft officials enabling him to dodge the draft.
Office of the President (POTUS)
Donald Trump
Warfare
Republicans
Nuclear
Edited 7 y ago
Posted 7 y ago
Responses: 204
During the Reagan Administration, the official warfighting strategy was to be able to win two wars at once. During the Clinton Administration, it was win one while holding another. Since then our capacity for fighting and winning has ebbed with the milquetoast "leadership" of the Obama Administration to the point where we ignored the true threats and sided with the wrong people.
Yes, we need to be ABLE to fight and win two fronts at once again. Note, we SHOULDN'T, but we should have the capability to do so. Under Reagan, terrorists were afraid, and for good reason. Bragging about blowing up American Servicemen earned one a combined arms airstrike that left you cowering in fear for two and a half decades. We need to be there again.
Yes, we need to be ABLE to fight and win two fronts at once again. Note, we SHOULDN'T, but we should have the capability to do so. Under Reagan, terrorists were afraid, and for good reason. Bragging about blowing up American Servicemen earned one a combined arms airstrike that left you cowering in fear for two and a half decades. We need to be there again.
Nice hit job on things he never said. The military service members know what he meant, sounds like propaganda from the MSM. Have you already forgotten why left Vietnam with our tails tucked between our legs? Want a picture of all our people and those we left behind that supported us on the rooftop. No, it wasn't the brave troops that fought a battle with one arm tied behind them by LBJ and that idiot, McNamara, NOT the troops, but the Democrat administration.
MCPO Roger Collins
SGT Chas Brothers How many do you see for LBJ and Macnamara? Kind of a dumb comment and I have little patience for dumb comments.
SGT Chas Brothers
MCPO Roger Collins - I wasn't responding to any remark you made in the first place asshat! Keep up with the fucking conversations or get the fuck out of my face.
MCPO Roger Collins
SGT Chas Brothers Believe me, the last thing I want is being in your face. You are the one that attempted to step on my dick, regarding a post from months ago.
SGT Chas Brothers
MCPO Roger Collins - I don't see how especially when my reply was meant for and replied to SGT Robert Bois le Duc! Trust me, I never intentionally step on a Navy mans dick; his bunk mate might get pissed!
Government can't make America "great" again. We the People made America great, not government. Government can't win wars. We the People win wars. In both cases, government gets in the way. We the People won in Vietnam. The government snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. We the People built a great economy. The government bled it until it was in the pitiful state you see today. If Trump drains the swamp, gets the government out from underfoot, we will be great again. We'll fight wars worth fighting and win them.
CPT Jack Durish
1stSgt Nelson Kerr - Sadly, the dictionary you're using has been preempted by the Left. Fascism is a form of socialism (as is Nazism - National Socialism - and Communism - International Socialism) Socialism is a Left Wing ideology. The only authoritarian ideologues I see in America are on the Left - the Progressives. They're bullying our children in schools, indoctrinating rather than educating. They're bullying We the People in the news and entertainment media, again attempting to indoctrinate rather than inform or entertain. They're bullying us in public places. They are Antifa. They have usurped the Democratic Party.
1stSgt Nelson Kerr
CPT Jack Durish - The entry I made was IAW the dictionary definition, no matter how much smoke you want to blow.
SSgt W. Aaron Gregory
The act of true deliberation, dialogue, and therefore diplomacy between two sides of a political argument will always be smeared with the diaper-doodies of Trump-haters. This will likely continue for the next 7-odd years. Their distinct inability to tell the difference between fascism, nationalism, and national socialism - and the ability to compare and contrast today with American's political spectrum - should always end your the dialogue with them. You cannot win a battle of intelligence with an unarmed adversary.
A nation with interests such as ours should always be prepared: (1) to defend itself to the point where an aggressor is completely destroyed, and never to return as a threat, and; (2) to preemptively and decisively strike when one of it's international interests or allies is threatened. Decisively. That means destroy the bastards. Not annoy them. Not scare them. Not make them pause, or make them think... but destroy them.
In my opinion, if a commander-in-chief makes his or her thought process more complicated than this, they failed. Mr. Trump, although unrefined by most political standards, is trying to fit this mold; Could he do a better job overall? Sure. Is he a better, more respected commander-in-chief than his predecessors? I think, absolutely.
A nation with interests such as ours should always be prepared: (1) to defend itself to the point where an aggressor is completely destroyed, and never to return as a threat, and; (2) to preemptively and decisively strike when one of it's international interests or allies is threatened. Decisively. That means destroy the bastards. Not annoy them. Not scare them. Not make them pause, or make them think... but destroy them.
In my opinion, if a commander-in-chief makes his or her thought process more complicated than this, they failed. Mr. Trump, although unrefined by most political standards, is trying to fit this mold; Could he do a better job overall? Sure. Is he a better, more respected commander-in-chief than his predecessors? I think, absolutely.
Brad Miller
SFC Mamerto Perez - America stopped being Great when the Left got enough influence (higher education) and control (congress) to keep the ordinary citizens from stepping up and doing what needed to be done. You can't fight, or swim, with your hands tied behind you.
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google
We have a border and we have a country that some politicians would love to hand over to someone else; as long as they stay in power. We need to be able to defend our borders with out having to ask permission; we should be able to defend our country, if it means taking the battle to foreign shores. Our current president is demonstrating that a red line is there for a reason, Assad got a taste of what resolve feels like.