Bush is a hero

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#170676 Oct 22, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>The logic he seems to be following usually holds that the U.S. forced Japan to declare war with the partial embargo (oil, aviation fuel, steel, among other things) because we were sticking our noses into something that wasn't our business - Japan's attempts to subdue China.
Yes, I know it's all the rage to re-examine US history with a hyper-critical eye. I have no problem with that, per se. Unvarnished historical honesty is vital to current and future assessments of policy.

In this case, the US interest in the 30's just happened to coincide with, or at least complement, China's interest, as European and Asian forces conspired to fragment the country and pick apart the remains. Our efforts in their behalf should be a rare matter of pride to anti-imperialists.

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#170677 Oct 22, 2013
NEWS-FLASH wrote:
And for those really skeptical, you guessed it, ANOTHER, questionable source.
http://longstreet.typepad.com/thesciencebooks...
WARNING LIFTED.
Far be it from me to cramp your style, but I was just wondering if you wouldn't mind coming out here at the outset and let us know what your overall thesis in all this might be? I'm sorry, I prefer a forthright approach, but if you'd rather be coy and leak out with witty asides, then by all means, do as you're comfortable. I was just wondering.

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#170678 Oct 22, 2013
NEWS-FLASH wrote:
*I edited numbers into your post. I hope its ok.
<quoted text>
1. Good people are being killed daily by bad people in other countries.
How many must be killed in order to justify War on those nations?
10, 100, 1000, 10,000 etc…
Should War be declared when your standard is met? And without bias?
Which countries should engage in this War?
2. Do you think the U.N. is a viable form of Government?
Do the Nations respect its authority?
Do you think that the “despots” as you put it, fear its teeth?
And again, when your standard is met, should War proceed without bias against the guilty Nation(s)? And by whom?
3. Are you associating these bad people with Nations / Governments / Extremists?
4. What if the ally is known to be corrupt and to also, from time to time, engage in unacceptable hostility against their own citizens?
5. Agreed, the World operates on generalities.
I’m guessing if more specifics were adhered to, War would cease for many of the very same reasons you stated above. Certainly a dark mark against human behavior.
Adding numbers is SOP, no problem.

1) There's a point where murdering good people stops being the responsibility of the local police force, and converts to genocide.
Human rights violations are a global concern, when the country involved either cannot handle the problem, or it's leadership is the root cause. MY "standards" are irrelevant. Bias should not be a determining factor. Engaging, supporting, or sitting out a war is up to the individual countries. Some join because they're allies. Some maybe because they feel the same way. Some may sit out because they believe NO war is ever justified for any reason.

2) The UN needs to be reformed (IMO), after they're booted out of the US. However, they happen to be the only global entity we have, when operated justly & properly, to call another nation (or nations) for severe violations. Despots have liitle fear because
some permanent members of the Security Council refuse to allow military force on the tabl, even as a last resort. Also there is nothing to fear from endless paper resolutions if there is no force to back it up.

3) Some yes, some not. Radical Muslims have hijacked a religion in order to justify their crusade against the west. Out of 1.6 billion Muslims, this small percentage of terrorists come from all corners. Many are brainwashed at a very early age, most are forced into wahabis and from there, into terrorist training camps including methods & reasoning for suicide attacks.

4) Corrupt allies of the US won't remain allies if the leadership refuses to cease these "hostilities" under insistance from US leaders. I know of no such US allied country fitting this description.

5) The world will ALWAYS have an evil "player" who only wants everything for himself, and his minions, and is willing to do anything to achieve that goal. War will always be necessary when the last wisp of diplomacy fails (IMO).
UIdiotRACEMAKEWO RLDPEACE

United States

#170679 Oct 22, 2013
no no NO! Bahhhahhaaaaa
Clearwater

Fort Lauderdale, FL

#170681 Oct 23, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>There ya go - reinforce that divide and dissolve TP mentality...
This from someone that voted for a guy (twice) that doesn't do anything better than dividing people. Do people on the left ever do as they preach? Ever?
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#170682 Oct 23, 2013
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>
1) Are these Whitehouse talking points?
2) Of course obama's going to blame the Republicans for his failures. You don't really expect him to blame his failed economic policies and his inability to control spending for the failing economy and any possible downgrades, do you?
3) I guess in the past five years you haven't noticed... obama lies.
4) You make it sound like you blame Republicans for the shutdown.
5) The House passed several bills to keep the government running, only to be ignored in the Senate.
6) The only thing I saw was a petulant pResident that did his best to use the government to inflict as much pain and inconvenience as possible on the people that voted for him to take care of them. I saw a vindictive pResident that spent more money on shutting down operations, than it took to let them stay open, just to hurt the public.
7) I also saw we have a lot of public employees that were paid not to work. With unemployment that was not required to be repaid, many made even more while not working than they did working.
I also heard a spiteful pResident that was willing to default on our debt obligations, rather than use monies that the Treasury continues to collect,(which are about 10x what is needed to meet our debt obligations), to get his way.
8) I also saw 25 old guard, big government, RINO Republican Senators that supported him. I only saw one group that fought for the interests of the American Public... the Tea Party.
=====
1) Yep. The ones you were warned would be coming.
2) Don't get snippy. He's doing exactly what I expected he'd do. He's turned this around, placed the blame elsewhere and The Tea Party just gave him a ton more ammunition to do it with. Now he's shooting at the GOP/Tea Party with it, he's making them bleed and YOU'RE annoyed? lol- Okay.
3) I've noticed. I've also noticed that he was elected. Twice, so I think it's safe to conclude that calling attention to the fact he lies, doesn't much matter and the fact that you want people to care means squat.
4) I blame the Tea Party for the shutdown.. and the fallout and the low poll numbers and the big money donors backing away. And the majority of the country blames the Tea Party too.(((SURPRISE)))
5) Correct. They told the Tea Party to stick it.
6) Tough lesson for you. The Tea Party opened Pandora's box and now you're complaining about what crawled out of it. Too bad.
7) Next time, give more thought to strategy. He didn't blink and he was never going to blink.
8) Check the polls. Americans didn't like your plan and the Tea Party, Ted Cruz, Mike Lee et al are taking hits at the polls because of it.

Look, you're right. Obama is a liar. Possibly pathological. He made the shutdown hurt more than he had to. He is foreign policy nightmare. He is domestic policy nightmare. He was just your average guy, Joe Blow, Mr. Freshman senator who should still be a community organizer in his spare time and not meeting with heads of state or overseeing national budgets or playing golf with Tiger Woods or flying in Air force One. He should never have been elected POTUS. You're right but it doesn't matter. In politics, being right isn't enough. You have to be smarter than the other guy.
I posted that editorial to show you how democrats would take the Tea Party and wring it's little neck if it went down this road. I posted the article to show you what democrats would say in retaliation to the "plan" Cruz set in motion. You were warned about the fallout. You were warned about the spin and getting all huffy won't help. If you can't take the bumps and bruises, get out of the ring and get out of the way. Swinging wildly at the opposition and missing doesn't do anything but expend energy.
The object, bobin, is to hit the target. Not become the target.
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#170683 Oct 23, 2013
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>
"We can't win."
Not the way you're going about it, you can't. Your Tea Party has heart, bobin but it doesn't have enough muscle, it's not politically smart and it's fighting on too many fronts.

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#170684 Oct 23, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>I hadn't yet been born in forty-two, so...no terror seizings...but we obviously invaded them...AFTER they declared war.

My point being, that the Aboriginal peoples didn't declare war on us until we'd been invading them for a couple of centuries....That country....
Agreed, on both counts.
Indisputably!

Had you lived in '42, the illustrations in Time would have sent you reeling. That, and would have enlisted you in the effort to repel "the evil" militarily or industrially.

Despite the fact that the published illustrations were an impossibility.

Gotta love the Media!

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#170685 Oct 23, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>My recollection was that the Japanese executed a devastating sneak attack on the US,...
Which was prompted by ....

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#170686 Oct 23, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>Sorry, I don't get your point. Possibly you're saying that if you had been there in 1942 you would have been among those few who had no concerns about Germany's intentions? I highly doubt that.
Just the opposite.
The piece was designed to incite.
The same as any other media piece.

The Germans wanted / needed to expand and their means for doing so were demonized by the very same countries who currently held land acquired the very same way.

Just saying...

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#170687 Oct 23, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text> But who's gonna knock a guy who just wants a little "lebensraum" for his people?
Kinda like the guy who recently announced that "Americans are Exceptional?" What was the implication?

That went over big within the international community. I'm sure it will come up again.

Egos run wild in the political streets but the sentiment is the same. Which Leader dare think the inverse?

Hitler just took it to the next level to his demise. Even his political bedfellows eventually hung him out to dry.

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#170688 Oct 23, 2013
NEWS-FLASH wrote:
<quoted text>Just the opposite.
The piece was designed to incite.
The same as any other media piece.
The Germans wanted / needed to expand and their means for doing so were demonized by the very same countries who currently held land acquired the very same way.
Just saying...
Poland acquired their land by blitzkrieg?

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#170689 Oct 23, 2013
NEWS-FLASH wrote:
<quoted text>
Which was prompted by ....
America's decision not to abet Japan's murderous and avaricious land-grabs by withholding war-making material.
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#170690 Oct 23, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>Poland acquired their land by blitzkrieg?
lol

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#170691 Oct 23, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>The logic he seems to be following usually holds that the U.S. forced Japan to declare war with the partial embargo (oil, aviation fuel, steel, among other things) because we were sticking our noses into something that wasn't our business - Japan's attempts to subdue China.
Seems to be?

Losing the very resources they were counting on to continue their expansion left them with few options. An American moral judgement saw to that. Securing another strategy was imperative no? Unfortunately for the U.S. and them, taking out the navel fleet stationed at Pearl Harbor would possibly give them the time needed to secure another vantage point to continue their expansion.

I guess they could've picked up their chips (dead) and went home.
Moral of the story: Not everybody gets to expand.

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#170692 Oct 23, 2013
NEWS-FLASH wrote:
<quoted text>
Kinda like the guy who recently announced that "Americans are Exceptional?" What was the implication?
That went over big within the international community. I'm sure it will come up again.
Egos run wild in the political streets but the sentiment is the same. Which Leader dare think the inverse?
Hitler just took it to the next level to his demise. Even his political bedfellows eventually hung him out to dry.
I agree that the "American exceptionalism" meme is hubristic, threadbare, and lacking in substance by any quantifiable measure. I note further that science-denialists, many of which have found their way into positions of policy from the local level all the way to the US Congress, have exacerbated the ideologically-driven dumbing-down of America.

The finer point in question, however, is "Was America's involvement in WWII necessary?" I maintain again that America was attacked by one country, and war subsequently declared upon it by two others. Given those irrefutable facts, I ask again, what would you have done in December 1941?

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#170693 Oct 23, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>Far be it from me to cramp your style, but I was just wondering if you wouldn't mind coming out here at the outset and let us know what your overall thesis in all this might be? I'm sorry, I prefer a forthright approach, but if you'd rather be coy and leak out with witty asides, then by all means, do as you're comfortable. I was just wondering.
No thesis. Just chewing the fat about necessary wars and what goes into making them necessary.

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#170694 Oct 23, 2013
bad bob wrote:
<quoted text>
Adding numbers is SOP, no problem.

1) There's a point where murdering good people stops being the responsibility of the local police force, and converts to genocide.
Human rights violations are a global concern, when the country involved either cannot handle the problem, or it's leadership is the root cause. MY "standards" are irrelevant. Bias should not be a determining factor. Engaging, supporting, or sitting out a war is up to the individual countries. Some join because they're allies. Some maybe because they feel the same way. Some may sit out because they believe NO war is ever justified for any reason.

2) The UN needs to be reformed (IMO), after they're booted out of the US. However, they happen to be the only global entity we have, when operated justly & properly, to call another nation (or nations) for severe violations. Despots have liitle fear because
some permanent members of the Security Council refuse to allow military force on the tabl, even as a last resort. Also there is nothing to fear from endless paper resolutions if there is no force to back it up.

3) Some yes, some not. Radical Muslims have hijacked a religion in order to justify their crusade against the west. Out of 1.6 billion Muslims, this small percentage of terrorists come from all corners. Many are brainwashed at a very early age, most are forced into wahabis and from there, into terrorist training camps including methods & reasoning for suicide attacks.

4) Corrupt allies of the US won't remain allies if the leadership refuses to cease these "hostilities" under insistence from US leaders. I know of no such US allied country fitting this description.

5) The world will ALWAYS have an evil "player" who only wants everything for himself, and his minions, and is willing to do anything to achieve that goal. War will always be necessary when the last wisp of diplomacy fails (IMO).
I wonder if the evil player sees himself as evil?
Extremists aside.

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#170695 Oct 23, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>Poland acquired their land by blitzkrieg?
lol, I guess I had that coming.
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#170696 Oct 23, 2013
NEWS-FLASH wrote:
<quoted text>
No thesis. Just chewing the fat about necessary wars and what goes into making them necessary.
One of my favorite wars was back in the 1890's called the Anglo-Zanzibar War. Shortest war in recorded history. It was over in under an hour.
KA-BOOM! KA-BOOM!

"No mas! No mas!"

hee hee

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 30 min ImPeach 25,612
Why do we live life when we have to die anyway? (Jul '13) 37 min Frank 301
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 1 hr River Tam 985,633
Why it's time for Donald Trump to RESIGN...in d... 4 hr Doctor REALITY 17
Truth About The Term: "White Nationalists" 4 hr Johnny 6
Satan is the white man's god (Jul '08) 5 hr juliakk 185
God is REAL - Miracles Happen! (Jun '11) 5 hr juliakk 6,444
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 6 hr PadMark 685,654
More from around the web