Don't never leave any one behind.
I get the sentiment, and I am in awe of duty. BUT....in Somalia, a fair few folks died trying to get bodies out of the wreakage of a downed chopper. At what point do you say "Stop sending the living after the dead"? Fight like hell to save the wounded or captured, but how many people are you willing to sacrifice for a corpse? If I were the corpse in question, my answer would be zero. But thats just my .02 and maybe its why I think think that the argument that says "We should send more soldiers to die because soldiers have already died here" doesn't hold much water with me. If the fight is necessary and winnable, fight. Hell, if its necessary and not winnable, still fight. But if its neither? Why exactly are we there?
Thats all I'm asking here. I want someone to tell me when we've won or lost. We've been there 10 years. What constitutes victory? You'll forgive me if I'm a bit pissed at having not one, but two, presidents fail to give me a one sentence answer to that question. We've spent billions of dollars and thousands of casulties, killed and wounded. What do we need to do? It seems to me, as a relatively simple man, that if you can't define what victory in a war is, maybe you should hesitate before going to war. I'm not a pacifist aand have no love for muslims. I just think we owe it to our troops to tell them exactly what constitutes victory and I've yet to hear it.

FQ13 Who really would like a good answer to this question, because while I will always support the troops, I don't think their leaders could find their ass with both hands and a map.
