Most of the time, yes. I think that is the only reson to get involved in wars that are not attacks on the USA-to prevent a genocidal situation. Self defense and protection of our autonomy are also valid reasons.
Most of the time, yes. I think that is the only reson to get involved in wars that are not attacks on the USA-to prevent a genocidal situation. Self defense and protection of our autonomy are also valid reasons.
As I said, WWII was a good war that was won with mass killing and acheived a lasting peace. However, since much of the killing was unnecessary it wasn't completely just.
Fire Bombing of Dresden
"....Critics of the bombing argue that Dresden—sometimes referred to as "Florence on the Elbe" (Elbflorenz)—was a cultural landmark of little or no military significance, and that the attacks were indiscriminate area bombing and not proportionate to the commensurate military gains.
'It seems to me that the moment has come when the question of bombing of German cities simply for the sake of increasing the terror, though under other pretexts, should be reviewed. Otherwise we shall come into control of an utterly ruined land… The destruction of Dresden remains a serious query against the conduct of Allied bombing. I am of the opinion that military objectives must henceforward be more strictly studied in our own interests than that of the enemy.'........"
Wikipedia
The N. Vietnamese were communists, i think because they were tired of colonial powers (France/US) coming into SE Asia, and taking the resources.
I'm a bit foggy on this - it was long ago.
Either way, it was their counrty, they could run any gov't as the please - the US was in Cold War hysteria - why JFK sent advisers in the first place;
but the escaaltion by LBJ was just pure paranoia run wild. we lost 53,000 men and women their on nothing but hysterical policy
After the fall of Saigon ; Vietnam has nothing significant to do with the Cold War. Meaning it never did in the first place, except our insane "domino theory" constructs we invented.
It is not genocide or close to it because that's not what genocide means. The truth shouldn't be that hard.It is genocide, or close to it, when civilian areas are attacked with weapons of mass destruction such as nukes, fire bombs and deadly chemicals. One of the many problems with war is people get so angry and/or start to like killing so much that they go beyond military necessity and into mass murder, this happens to even the most "civilized" people.
I have a lot of sympathy and feel really, really bad about victims of terrorism. Feel better? If I haven't said that before it is because it is too obvious to state since no one on this forum has defended terrorism. Not only that, I actively protested against terrorism when it was being done to the Nicaraguans thirty years ago and people were defending it.
The leader of the Pakistani Taliban, Hakimullah Mehsud, has been killed in a US drone strike sources are confirming to the BBC.
BBC News - Hakimullah Mehsud killed by drone, Pakistan Taliban say
Again??? How many times do we have to kill the leader of the Taliban before he's dead? Don't they kill him about twice a month? And the net gain is.....?
The leader of the Pakistani Taliban, Hakimullah Mehsud, has been killed in a US drone strike sources are confirming to the BBC.
BBC News - Hakimullah Mehsud killed by drone, Pakistan Taliban say
Again??? How many times do we have to kill the leader of the Taliban before he's dead? Don't they kill him about twice a month? And the net gain is.....?
They keep coming up with new ones apparently, though some may be getting more reluctant to run for their highest office. There is now less status in the job and the risk/reward factors are growing further apart.
One dead, 50 new fighters born. Great job.
You people would run from a snowball fight, I swear.
appreciate your ideas. and yes the debate is an old oneNo need to get into a debate about Vietnam, Annata, but I supported the Americans against the Communists because of the tens of millions of people the communist killed and the tens of millions more whose chances in life were ruined. If you believe the Americans were the bad guys in Vietnam then we'll let it go at that.
You people would run from a snowball fight, I swear.
Allah is their leader. People on the ground are just full of rhetoric and hate that they can relate to.You never know, it could decrease moral to kill their leader.
They are enemies as supporters of Al-Qaueda (among other things) and as such we should be conducting such strikes and disposing of our enemies through death or being prisoners of war.
mur·der
/ˈmərdər/
noun
noun: murder; plural noun: murders1. the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.
"the stabbing murder of an off-Broadway producer"
synonyms: killing, homicide, assassination, liquidation, extermination, execution, slaughter, butchery, massacre; More
1. Per both the USA's and international law, killing that is not in self defense, not on a battlefield and not after a trial is considered murder.
2. Many of the people targetted by drones are not enemies of the USA, they are involved in Yemen and Somalia's civil wars.
3. I don't believe that a handful of government officials acting in secret with limited information should be trusted to pick people to assassinate all over the world. I belive in due process and fair trials, formerly considered a traditional "American" value.
Sure, but that is still no justification for endless war in the ME that we find ourselves in.
endless
Sure, but that is still no justification for endless war in the ME that we find ourselves in.
Of course it will be endless if the argument concerns withdrawal dates rather than how to decisively win the damned things.
There is no winning it. Other than utter and complete annihilation of a whole religion.
You seem to have stumbled across the answer.
Goes back to no winning it. We will never do that. I dont think we want the blood of a billion people on our hands anyway.
Why a billion? Do you have any support for that number?
But in fact that tactic stopped the war in Japan, the killing ended and the relationship with the Japanese has been positive ever since. In Germany's case they didn't finish the job in WWI so WWII began shortly after. Only when Germany was absolutely devastated did the fighting stop and they too have been peaceful ever since, and again with excellent relations.
Talk of 'red lines in the sand' and not following through is thoughtless prattle and something we could expect from an inexperienced liberal dealing with world tensions. A couple of warnings followed by a clear follow through to any country harboring terrorists,would discourage any nations sympathies for religious fanatics.
Obama is no leader and no serious people listen to him. The USA has to grab the attention of those who plot against them and their allies and then act in a serious manner. The terrorists and their supporters are certainly serious and we should be too.
There is no winning it. Other than utter and complete annihilation of a whole religion.
I really quit reading at bigoted. You obviously failed reading comprehension.How astonishingly bigoted. It's astonishing to me how many people of the 'anti-war' persuasion really just cloak their bigotry behind pacific verbiage. The preconceived notions you have about the people who live across this part of the world exemplify why you are not only so wrong in your analysis of the situation, but why you cannot even understand it.
.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?