• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Which US Wars Were Justifiable?

Which US Wars Were Justifiable When the US Entered Them?


  • Total voters
    56

aberrant85

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 30, 2013
Messages
594
Reaction score
209
Location
SF Bay Area
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
For the purpose of this poll, the question is, at the time the US entered into war, was it justifiable to do so, both in its time and in hindsight.
 
For the purpose of this poll, the question is, at the time the US entered into war, was it justifiable to do so, both in its time and in hindsight.

Well. someone justified each of them.
Recently, I'd say Afghanistan was justified but not Iraq. Bush senior's excellent adventure in Iraq was barely justifiable, if you can get past the whole feudal-despotism-in-Kuwait thing.
Grenada? Laughable.
 
For the purpose of this poll, the question is, at the time the US entered into war, was it justifiable to do so, both in its time and in hindsight.

I'd say any war when the US was attacked, a war declared on the US or an US ally, or which had UN backing was justified.

Generally speaking, I think wars of defense and cases of collective security actions are justified.

I know too few on the Spanish-American war to say much about that, but I think WW1 & 2 were justified (Germany/Japan declared war on the US and/or directly attacked the US). Korea was justified, because South Korea was a US ally and under attack. Gulf War and Afghanistan had UN backing.

That doesn't mean anything goes in a war; of course, the US too must abide to war law and not commit war crimes. The US clearly failed in these regards in case of Vietnam, but some questionable actions were taken in Iraq too.

When war crimes are committed by US soldiers without being ordered, they must be prosecuted; so must officers or government officials giving the orders for war crimes.
 
Well. someone justified each of them.
Recently, I'd say Afghanistan was justified but not Iraq. Bush senior's excellent adventure in Iraq was barely justifiable, if you can get past the whole feudal-despotism-in-Kuwait thing.
Grenada? Laughable.

Dangit, I meant to make it public.

I voted for Afghanistan, Gulf War, WWI and WWII, and the Union. Least justifiable of those I voted for would either be WWI or Gulf War, except that we were coming to the aid of allies. Korea is almost justifiable except for that it was really a civil war that didn't really affect us, provoking China was stupid, and the whole policy of containment was BS.
 
I actually meant to click the Gulf War, I messed up. Also checked Afghanistan, WWI, WWII, Korea and Union.
 
"At this point, what difference does it make?" Hillary Clinton, Housewife
 
Well. someone justified each of them.
Recently, I'd say Afghanistan was justified but not Iraq. Bush senior's excellent adventure in Iraq was barely justifiable, if you can get past the whole feudal-despotism-in-Kuwait thing.
Grenada? Laughable.
Bush Sr, not really a Sr, had no adventure in Iraq. He stopped our troops at the Kuwait Border as the Iraq army retreated.
 
In on one, cant wait to hear how we let WWII start and how the Russians won it for us.
 
I'd say any war when the US was attacked, a war declared on the US or an US ally, or which had UN backing was justified.

Generally speaking, I think wars of defense and cases of collective security actions are justified.

I know too few on the Spanish-American war to say much about that, but I think WW1 & 2 were justified (Germany/Japan declared war on the US and/or directly attacked the US). Korea was justified, because South Korea was a US ally and under attack. Gulf War and Afghanistan had UN backing.

That doesn't mean anything goes in a war; of course, the US too must abide to war law and not commit war crimes. The US clearly failed in these regards in case of Vietnam, but some questionable actions were taken in Iraq too.

When war crimes are committed by US soldiers without being ordered, they must be prosecuted; so must officers or government officials giving the orders for war crimes.

I would remove war crimes committed by US forces from the equation for the purpose of this poll, because I'm more interested in whether at the time the US entered the war if there was good justification for doing so. Individuals have committed war crimes in basically every conflict.

It would be another interesting question as to whether the results of the war justified fighting it. In which case you could argue that the Spanish American War, and for that matter the Mexican American War, were worth it in the long run because of the territory the US gained, although the reasons for starting the war were questionable.
 
In on one, cant wait to hear how we let WWII start and how the Russians won it for us.

You mean WWIII? Cause actually it can be argued that they did win WWII, if not for us than at least more than us, in Europe (but not the Pacific).
 
I would remove war crimes committed by US forces from the equation for the purpose of this poll, because I'm more interested in whether at the time the US entered the war if there was good justification for doing so. Individuals have committed war crimes in basically every conflict.

It would be another interesting question as to whether the results of the war justified fighting it. In which case you could argue that the Spanish American War, and for that matter the Mexican American War, were worth it in the long run because of the territory the US gained, although the reasons for starting the war were questionable.

Ok. I don't think gaining territory justifies a war. Otherwise, the Nazi wars would have been justified too, if they had been successful.
 
You mean WWIII? Cause actually it can be argued that they did win WWII, if not for us than at least more than us, in Europe (but not the Pacific).

No, had Hitler not been busy fighting us through out France. He would have had the resources to divert to Russia. Also one of Russia's problems with man power and equipment was the invasion of Finland in 1940 that while Finland and Russia came to a truce.
Russia lost well over 120K men and hundreds of tanks.
Finland lost 11% of her lands and 30% of her assets to Russia, but neither were helpful in fighting the Germans who came within 20 miles of the Kremlin.
Oh, and WWIII? Its already on and been on for 60 years.
 
None of the above.
 
Ok. I don't think gaining territory justifies a war. Otherwise, the Nazi wars would have been justified too, if they had been successful.

Agreed, I just mean to say it's hard to tell Americans in Arizona or California nowadays that we should return their land back to Mexico. So no, the ends don't justify the means, but with the intervening history too much has happened to completely indict the wars and their results.

No, had Hitler not been busy fighting us through out France. He would have had the resources to divert to Russia. Also one of Russia's problems with man power and equipment was the invasion of Finland in 1940 that while Finland and Russia came to a truce.
Russia lost well over 120K men and hundreds of tanks.
Finland lost 11% of her lands and 30% of her assets to Russia, but neither were helpful in fighting the Germans who came within 20 miles of the Kremlin.
Oh, and WWIII? Its already on and been on for 60 years.

Actually, Germany made its last gains in Russia by 1943, before US Troops landed in France. By that point most historians would tell you that the war was lost for them.
 
Agreed, I just mean to say it's hard to tell Americans in Arizona or California nowadays that we should return their land back to Mexico. So no, the ends don't justify the means, but with the intervening history too much has happened to completely indict the wars and their results.



Actually, Germany made its last gains in Russia by 1943, before US Troops landed in France. By that point most historians would tell you that the war was lost for them.
The Normandy invasion was no secret. They knew they could not take more troops from France, Poland, Italy and not be back doored at the Rhine.
It was no secret that we were coming once we started the Lend Lease program with Britain and sending pilots over.
 
The Normandy invasion was no secret. They knew they could not take more troops from France, Poland, Italy and not be back doored at the Rhine.
It was no secret that we were coming once we started the Lend Lease program with Britain and sending pilots over.

wwii casualties.jpg

File:World-War-II-military-deaths-in-Europe-by-theater-year.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The numbers really speak for themselves. Germany lost about 5 times as many troops in the Eastern front.
 
For the purpose of this poll, the question is, at the time the US entered into war, was it justifiable to do so, both in its time and in hindsight.

You only listed a small percentaghe of America's war to select from.

Here's my list of justifiable wars America fought.

1798-1800 -- Undeclared Naval War with France. This contest included land actions, such as that in the Dominican Republic, city of Puerto Plata, where marines captured a French privateer under the guns of the forts.

1801-05 -- Tripoli. The First Barbary War included the USS George Washington and USS Philadelphia affairs and the Eaton expedition, during which a few marines landed with United States Agent William Eaton to raise a force against Tripoli in an effort to free the crew of the Philadelphia. Tripoli declared war but not the United States.

1812 -- Amelia Island and other - parts of east Florida, then under Spain. Temporary possession was authorized by President Madison and by Congress, to prevent occupation by any other power; but possession was obtained by Gen. George Matthews in so irregular a manner that his measures were disavowed by the President.

1812-15 -- War of 1812. On June 18, 1812, the United States declared war between the United States and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. Among the issues leading to the war were British interception of neutral ships and blockades of the United States during British hostilities with France.

1813-14 -- Marguesas Islands. U.S. forces built a fort on the island of Nukahiva to protect three prize ships which had been captured from the British.

1814-25 -- Caribbean. Engagements between pirates and American ships or squadrons took place repeatedly especially ashore and offshore about Cuba, Puerto Rico, Santo Domingo, and Yucatan. Three thousand pirate attacks on merchantmen were reported between 1815 and 1823. In 1822 Commodore James Biddle employed a squadron of two frigates, four sloops of war, two brigs, four schooners, and two gunboats in the West Indies.

1815 -- Algiers. The second Barbary War was declared by the opponents but not by the United States. Congress authorized an expedition. A large fleet under Decatur attacked Algiers and obtained indemnities.

1820-23 -- Africa. Naval units raided the slave traffic pursuant to the 1819 act of Congress.

1822 -- Cuba. United States naval forces suppressing piracy landed on the northwest coast of Cuba and burned a pirate station.

1823 -- Cuba. Brief landings in pursuit of pirates occurred April 8 near Escondido; April 16 near Cayo Blanco; July 11 at Siquapa Bay; July 21 at Cape Cruz; and October 23 at Camrioca.

1824 -- Cuba. In October the USS Porpoise landed bluejackets near Matanzas in pursuit of pirates. This was during the cruise authorized in 1822.

1824 -- Puerto Rico (Spanish territory). Commodore David Porter with a landing party attacked the town of Fajardo which had sheltered pirates and insulted American naval officers. He landed with 200 men in November and forced an apology. Commodore Porter was later court-martialed for overstepping his powers.

1825 -- Cuba. In March cooperating American and British forces landed at Sagua La Grande to capture pirates.

1827 -- Greece. In October and November landing parties hunted pirates on the islands of Argenteire, Miconi, and Androse.

1831-32 -- Falkland Islands. Captain Duncan of the USS Lexington investigated the capture of three American sealing vessels and sought to protect American interests.

1832 -- Sumatra - February 6 to 9. A naval force landed and stormed a fort to punish natives of the town of Quallah Battoo for plundering the American ship Friendship.

1841 -- Drummond Island, Kingsmill Group. A naval party landed to avenge the murder of a seaman by the natives.

1841 -- Samoa - February 24. A naval party landed and burned towns after the murder of an American seaman on Upolu Island.

1843 -- Africa -- November 29 to December 16. Four United States vessels demonstrated and landed various parties (one of 200 marines and sailors) to discourage piracy and the slave trade along the Ivory coast, and to punish attacks by the natives on American seamen and shipping.

1846-48 -- Mexican War. On May 13,1846, the United States recognized the existence of a state of war with Mexico. After the annexation of Texas in 1845, the United States and Mexico failed to resolve a boundary dispute and President Polk said that it was necessary to deploy forces in Mexico to meet a threatened invasion.

1849 -- Smyrna. In July a naval force gained release of an American seized by Austrian officials.

1851 -- Turkey. After a massacre of foreigners (including Americans) at Jaffa in January, a demonstration by the Mediterranean Squadron was ordered along the Turkish (Levant) coast.

1851 -- Johanns Island (east of Africa) -- August. Forces from the U.S. sloop of war Dale exacted redress for the unlawful imprisonment of the captain of an American whaling brig.

1854 -- Nicaragua -- July 9 to 15. Naval forces bombarded and burned San Juan del Norte (Greytown) to avenge an insult to the American Minister to Nicaragua.

1855 -- China -- May 19 to 21. U.S. forces protected American interests in Shanghai and, from August 3 to 5 fought pirates near Hong Kong.

1855 -- Fiji Islands -- September 12 to November 4. An American naval force landed to seek reparations for depredations on American residents and seamen.

1858 -- Fiji Islands -- October 6 to 16. A marine expedition chastised natives for the murder of two American citizens at Waya.

1858-59 -- Turkey. The Secretary of State requested a display of naval force along the Levant after a massacre of Americans at Jaffa and mistreatment elsewhere "to remind the authorities (of Turkey) of the power of the United States."

1859 -- Mexico. Two hundred United States soldiers crossed the Rio Grande in pursuit of the Mexican bandit Cortina.

1866 -- Mexico. To protect American residents, General Sedgwick and 100 men in November obtained surrender of Matamoras. After 3 days he was ordered by U.S. Government to withdraw. His act was repudiated by the President.

1866 -- China. From June 20 to July 7, U.S. forces punished an assault on the American consul at Newchwang.

1871 -- Korea -- June 10 to 12. A U.S. naval force attacked and captured five forts to punish natives for depredations on Americans, particularly for murdering the crew of the General Sherman and burning the schooner, and for later firing on other American small boats taking soundings up the Salee River.

1873 -- Mexico. United States troops crossed the Mexican border repeatedly in pursuit of cattle and other thieves. There were some reciprocal pursuits by Mexican troops into border territory. Mexico protested frequently. Notable cases were at Remolina in May 1873 and at Las Cuevas in 1875. Washington orders often supported these excursions. Agreements between Mexico and the United States, the first in 1882, finally legitimized such raids. They continued intermittently, with minor disputes, until 1896.

1874 -- Hawaiian Islands -- February 12 to 20. Detachments from American vessels were landed to preserve order and protect American lives and interests during the coronation of a new king.

1876 -- Mexico -- May 18. An American force was landed to police the town of Matamoras temporarily while it was without other government.

1899--1901 -- Philippine Islands. U.S. forces protected American interests following the war with Spain and conquered the islands by defeating the Filipinos in their war for independence.

1900 -- China -- May 24 to September 28. American troops participated in operations to protect foreign lives during the Boxer rising, particularly at Peking. For many years after this experience a permanent legation guard was maintained in Peking, and was strengthened at times as trouble threatened.

1904 -- Tangier, Morocco. "We want either Perdicaris alive or Raisula dead." A squadron demonstrated to force release of a kidnapped American.
 
View attachment 67154113

File:World-War-II-military-deaths-in-Europe-by-theater-year.png - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The numbers really speak for themselves. Germany lost about 5 times as many troops in the Eastern front.
For sure, but they could not take any more from the European theater to send to the Eastern front. Had they been able to, It very well may had turned out different.
I dont minimize the efforts of the Russians in WWII, but to say "they won the war" is just not all true.
The allies let them take Berlin, because the allies knew what hell they would bring with them. And they did. German soldiers were fighting their way out of Berlin to surrender to US troops.
 
Agreed, I just mean to say it's hard to tell Americans in Arizona or California nowadays that we should return their land back to Mexico. So no, the ends don't justify the means, but with the intervening history too much has happened to completely indict the wars and their results.

Oh yes, absolutely! Giving back territories *now*, a dozen generations later, would cause much more injustice than it would cure.
 
For sure, but they could not take any more from the European theater to send to the Eastern front. Had they been able to, It very well may had turned out different.
I dont minimize the efforts of the Russians in WWII, but to say "they won the war" is just not all true.
The allies let them take Berlin, because the allies knew what hell they would bring with them. And they did. German soldiers were fighting their way out of Berlin to surrender to US troops.

No doubt it was a team effort. German war planners had long feared a two-front war even before WWI, which is why Hitler planned to take control of Western Europe before turning on Russia. In the end, though, most Germans were horrified by the revenge of the Russians, which is why they were racing to surrender to the Western allies. In fact, some of most delusional of them wanted the US and UK to join forces with Germany against Russia.

When it came to taking Berlin, Eisenhower decided to let Russia do the job, figuring it better to let them have the glory than to allow more Americans to die when the war was basically over.

I appreciate American valor too, but I have to accept history's judgment. I give the US full credit for beating Japan.
 
Bush Sr, not really a Sr, had no adventure in Iraq. He stopped our troops at the Kuwait Border as the Iraq army retreated.

Sorry, my mistake.
 
For the purpose of this poll, the question is, at the time the US entered into war, was it justifiable to do so, both in its time and in hindsight.

The Gulf War and the Iraq war can actually be considered different phases of the same war as US troops were never fully disengaged between the two.
 
The Gulf War and the Iraq war can actually be considered different phases of the same war as US troops were never fully disengaged between the two.

Yes, and no. That history is fascinating. The Gulf War achieved its stated objectives, something the US usually has trouble with, by removing Saddam's forces from Kuwait. Many of the military planners, including Colin Powell, were aware of the hazards of carrying the war into Iraq. Still, the no-fly-zones, intermittent bombing campaigns, and weapons inspections all came after the Gulf War ended and before the second war. It's amazing how well those worked to defang Saddam, but the militant and paranoid neo-cons were too delusional to realize it and were convinced he was as great a danger as ever.
 
Back
Top Bottom