In hindsight should we just bomb our enemies into submission and let them rebuild their own countries ?

Question

With the promise to bomb them again if they don't come to heel.

Answer 1

Why stop with out enemies? Doesn`t everyone get friendlier when we bomb a few hundred thousand of their people to death?

Answer 2

1. You'd quickly run out of bombs.

2. The enemies can fight back and would combine to bomb you flat.

Answer 3

In hindsight we shouldn't bomb unless they attack or threaten us- in hindsight. Hundreds of thousands more, of mostly innocent Iraq's, would have died of malnutrition and disease. In the case of Afghanistan you may have an argument-they're mostly opium growers and there's nothing worth rebuilding anyway.

Answer 4

Unfortunately we end up paying for rebuilding so either way we lose.

Answer 5

The military leaders know how to win a war. Politicians interfere with this process. Vietnam is one example, Iraq is the other. This war could have been over a year ago.

Answer 6

Sounds good to me. The only problem is...some can bomb back.

Answer 7

because we are vulnerable to terrorists. one man with one bomb or whatever can inflict terrible damage on people.

that is what they have learned. the man on tv explained that one ied device can be assemble for about the cost of a large pizza hut pizza. we had best not get any other conflicts started, eh? we can blow up their stuff and they can get revenge. so, better think very carefully beforehand.