Perfect War?

[Member2019]

The reasons for WWII ...

Premium Link Upgrade
As I understand, this particular answer will take the thread away from its main point of discussion.
I hope this link gives a glimpse of the reason,

It's a rather shallow explanation.

Hitler did not come to power without the people and their popularist viewpoints.
And the people didn't need a popularist leader without their country being left for dead in the terms of the end of WWI.
If you want some answers, you look Algiers or Vietnam, you'll see the same reason.

As an American, I'm regularly beat up because of our so-called "attrocities."
I'll take my country's history against any other European power in the 20th century any day.
Especially in how we've treated those we've defeated.

 

[Member2019]

It's not defined by the war itself ...

After I posted this:
Premium Link Upgrade

It really jogged my viewpoint to the obviousness of the truth.
The war itself never defines whether it is "good or bad."
War is virtually only negative.

But what really matters is how you conduct your nation after you win a war.
Step one is realizing that any "punishment" only hurts the people, and doesn't let them heal.
It only seeds further inflamation and hatred against the winner for another day.

 

[blakey]

Premium Link Upgrade

 

[E-Ann-Hilden]

A war started on false pretenses, lack of preparation, failed goals and how to achieve them, mismanagement by the current government and its minions, Countless American lives lost, a failed occupation with a lack of support of a very divided country and large financial gains by corporate America = All those things + total failure. This applies to Iraq and Afghanistan...

If everything the current adminstration has said is wrong and has not worked, why should we maintain the same course with this war?

 

[Member2019]

Unfortunately ...

Premium Link Upgrade
The liberal media and the democrats continually say that nothing was ever found. But I have friends that were over there and a couple who came back in caskets and the ones who came back alive assure me that weapons were found.

Unfortunately, the mass quantities were not found.
That's not to say they didn't exist at one time, but we didn't capture them and prevent their possible, future use.
As I've long argued, 2003 was way too late!

Bush had the balls to go in there he just doesn't have the brains to plan anything more complicated than a Lincoln Log cabin (and he would probably forget the door).

The problems with Texan Presidents is that they always feel they have to prove they have balls.

If Clinton would have done it the media would have been kissing his ass telling him how smart he was. It all depends on personal agendas.

I have to agree there.
Clinton deployed US weapons in more unilateral actions than any President in recent history.
He just didn't do anything major, or put US troops on the ground in actual, known combat -- only peacekeeping.
People forget about all the bombings and cruise missile attacks.

But, frankly, I don't agree with either.

 

[Member2019]

Huh?

and large financial gains by corporate America

And they didn't under Clinton, let alone didn't do many things *******? Not!
Frankly, I'm tired of this rhetoric, especially given the total, widespread ********* of GAAP "common sense" under Clinton, and especially Hillary's "big business" ties (#1 reason I prefer Obama by far).
That's when the middle class really got fucked, and the "big whigs" made out like bandits -- under Clinton, not W.

BTW, corporations are paying more corporate taxes than ever, thanx to actually lowering personal income taxes and getting rid of some corporate loopholes.
Goes back to Alexander Hamilton, who predict "the point of diminishing returns."
It also explains why the US has a much higher GDP than other nations, and China is experiencing much of the same (ironically, under a communist regime!).

 

[Member2019]

The difference ...

well, i suppose bush and blair just decided not to tell anyone about the wmds that were found - nobody ever questioned them on the matter or made a fuss about it after all

WMDs were found in Iraq.
But they were no where near the stockpiles as reported by Hans Blix in 2002.

So, in the end, the US and its coalition failed to secure them.
So, in the end, we achieved none of the security we promised.

In 1995, our intelligence under-estimated, and were proven wrong thanx to defectors in 1996.
In 2003, we over-estimated, and were proven wrong thanx to still unknown, undocumented details.

Iraq was unlike any other nation who was guilty of producing WMDs (let alone lost a war).
Libya, South Africa -- heck, even North Korea (after 1994 and prior to 1999) -- documented and detailed their capabilities.

Iraq never, ever did, and that was always the problem.
Especially in 1996 -- after Iraq "bought off" France and Russia in 1995, and the US believed them when they blocked inspections in the Security Council.

We looked like asses in 1996 for under-estimating and thinking other Security Council members wouldn't outright lie for commercial gain with Iraq.
So in 2003 -- based on the same Clinton administration intelligence and planning -- we did the opposite.

People like to talk about "unilateral US actions" and being "unique."
Quite the opposite! People should read up on the history of this whole "second invasion" -- it begins in 1995.

We couldn't even trust our own, so-called "allies" would be truthful.
And after the documents discovered in late 2003 proving the French and Russian involvements in the 1995 deception, you can't really hold them blameless for the "problem."

To make sanctions work, you have to provide a united front.
That's also what all 4 countries -- China, Japan, South Korea and the US -- now agree caused the 1994 agreement with North Korea to fail as well.

 

[meesterperfect]

But WHY does it seem like so many people are just being ignorant, and thinking this war is something so unique, so different, such an exception from any past war?

All this being said, I don't condone everything about this war. I have questions and concerns about any armed conflict. And the longer it goes on, the more questions and concerns I have. But why is this war being held to such a (unfair) higher standard? ......was the original topic.

Maybe because too many people are too caught up in their lives too realize there is a threat. Or don't want too admit it. Its easier too blame Bush.
Maybe because too many people forget too quickly.
Maybe its will take something really really big for many to see the truth.

 

[Member2019]

Which is why we repeat history ...

Maybe because too many people are too caught up in their lives too realize there is a threat. Or don't want too admit it. Its easier too blame Bush.
Maybe because too many people forget too quickly.
Maybe its will take something really really big for many to see the truth.

Which is why we continue to repeat history.

 

[pussy+dickdenice]

Hi Prof,
It's a long list of quotes to put in here. From 'shallow explanation' to '(your) change of view of perfect war' to 'vanishing wmds' to 'documentation of wmds'.

But I was not blaming any one. You know me better than that. If you don't, its my naivety and my personal loss.

I was stating facts as I saw it. And you did yours. Time and again I have come back to the topic of the thread. But unfortunately, found it going away from the topic, either to B-bashing or "as someone said, "C-A-kissing". (off the record, as pd is, you must know by this time, she said, "is C's A that sweet?" I reserved my comment. ) And so on to so forth.

You talked about Premium Link Upgrade and about Premium Link Upgrade . Both these links originated in US.

But what I'm more interested to find out is "the treatment after the war". I want to learn your side of " Premium Link Upgrade Premium Link Upgrade "

These are my :2 cents:, but I'm interested in your dollar.
Regards
dd

ps: this is not personal, I just want to broaden my view. :hatsoff:

 

[Member2019]

You just made my point!

You talked about Premium Link Upgrade and about Premium Link Upgrade . Both these links originated in US.

You have got to be kidding me?

First off, do you know the first thing about the Barbary Pirates? No, obviously not. Especially since you're comparing a piracy issue to later, French colonization -- where hundreds of thousands of people were ******** and ******! God, you just made my point!

It's beyond the fact that these pirates went around demanding tribute from countless nations, which resulted in them demanding 1/4th of the US Federal Budget at one point! (I mean, we were dirty poor compared to European nations, and couldn't even pay what we promised the French, let alone their servicemen). It's about the fact that they were not exactly "well liked" by their own, harboring states, and the US helped put them down, along with other, interested leaders in the region!

Again, you are comparing the US Marines and the Barbary Pirates to French colonization of Algiers? You have to be joking me?!?!?!

As far as Vietnam, did you even read the page? I can explain the inability of the US to win the will of the Vietnamese people in one statement, "Wait, don't shoot, we're here to help you, we're not French colonist" when we looked exactly like them from the common Vietnamese viewpoint. Dude, read up on the post-WWII decolonization efforts of every western nation, at the insistence of the US, and the utter disregard of that by the French.

Then read up on the atrocities of the French in Vietnam before the US' got involved. Sigh, it's just completely skewed, and the US just gets smacked -- probably because our media isn't state controlled, unlike virtually every other nation.

But what I'm more interested to find out is "the treatment after the war". I want to learn your side of " Premium Link Upgrade Premium Link Upgrade "
These are my :2 cents:, but I'm interested in your dollar.
Regards
ps: this is not personal, I just want to broaden my view. :hatsoff:

You obviously haven't read a thing on French colonization, actions and its results, through even the last few decades.
Not even remotely comparable in how the people were treated -- not even remotely.
Which makes the "*******" label a joke in comparison.

 

[pussy+dickdenice]

in continuation:

Premium Link Upgrade Premium Link Upgrade Premium Link Upgrade

:thumbsup: ???????????

 

[pussy+dickdenice]

Re: You just made my point!

You have got to be kidding me?

First off, do you know the first thing about the Barbary Pirates? No, obviously not. Especially since you're comparing a piracy issue to later, French colonization -- where hundreds of thousands of people were ******** and ******! God, you just made my point!

It's beyond the fact that these pirates went around demanding tribute from countless nations, which resulted in them demanding 1/4th of the US Federal Budget at one point! (I mean, we were dirty poor compared to European nations, and couldn't even pay what we promised the French, let alone their servicemen). It's about the fact that they were not exactly "well liked" by their own, harboring states, and the US helped put them down, along with other, interested leaders in the region!

Again, you are comparing the US Marines and the Barbary Pirates to French colonization of Algiers? You have to be joking me?!?!?!

As far as Vietnam, did you even read the page? I can explain the inability of the US to win the will of the Vietnamese people in one statement, "Wait, don't shoot, we're here to help you, we're not French colonist" when we looked exactly like them from the common Vietnamese viewpoint. Dude, read up on the post-WWII decolonization efforts of every western nation, at the insistence of the US, and the utter disregard of that by the French.

Then read up on the atrocities of the French in Vietnam before the US' got involved. Sigh, it's just completely skewed, and the US just gets smacked -- probably because our media isn't state controlled, unlike virtually every other nation.

You obviously haven't read a thing on French colonization, actions and its results, through even the last few decades.
Not even remotely comparable in how the people were treated -- not even remotely.
Which makes the "*******" label a joke in comparison.

You are perfectly clear, Prof. So your MORAL VALUE does accept "whatever it is"; if it is done by your own country. Thanks again. I wanted your confirmation and I got it.

 

[Member2019]

Honestly, I give up ...

in continuation:
Premium Link Upgrade Premium Link Upgrade Premium Link Upgrade
:thumbsup: ???????????

Isn't it nice that the US military actually investigates and prosecutes its own when they ******* the "rules of engagement"?

But you go right ahead and criticize the US in comparison to even western European countries that have state-run media, and have been guilty of *********
(and I mean really *********, not just taking their clothes off or playing "loud music" and ******* civilians in the thousands!.
And I'm not talking about before WWII, but decades upon decades after WWII!

Again, I'll take the US in Vietnam any day against the French of the same period!
And Iraq today? Give me a break, not even comparable to those events!

Why do I bother?
People here obviously only know the history spoon fed to them, or only those things the independent, US media can, but other, state-run media outlets will never do in their own countries.
Blame the US, it's much easier than looking at what your own country has done.

And it's easier without the independent media and self-prosecuting military aspects as well.
Let alone no military leader has ever lead a coup or undermined the elected civilians of the United States in its entire history.

 

[Member2019]

You just made my point again!

You are perfectly clear, Prof. So your MORAL VALUE does accept "whatever it is"; if it is done by your own country. Thanks again. I wanted your confirmation and I got it.

Yep, that's exactly what you twisted it into.
What I said was that many citizens of many nations have NO GROUND TO STAND ON in comparison.
They should actually look at the actions of their countries FIRST before they even start pointing fingers at the US.

Sigh, the Barbary Pirates? Man, sorry, just gotta laugh -- at least in comparison to the French colonization I was referring to.

 

[RogueWolf]

Wow...this thread sure has gone far from what I originally asked...

Premium Image Content

Upgrade to Premium to view all images in this thread

Upgrade to Premium

Can't say I'm surprised...

Premium Image Content

Upgrade to Premium to view all images in this thread

Upgrade to Premium

 

[Member2019]

Wow...this thread sure has gone far from what I originally asked...

Premium Image Content

Upgrade to Premium to view all images in this thread

Upgrade to Premium

Can't say I'm surprised...

Premium Image Content

Upgrade to Premium to view all images in this thread

Upgrade to Premium

No, because people don't know their history.
If it's history, and it's negative, it must have been the US' fault.

Man, I'm still in shock -- the Barbary Pirates compared to the later French colonization of Algiers?
Oh man, I don't know if I should laugh or cry?
The US' tussle with the Barbary Pirates caused the French to colonize Algiers and all those atrocities?
Oh man, can I please get a second person to laugh with me in utter disbelief?

 

[RogueWolf]

No, because people don't know their history.
If it's history, and it's negative, it must have been the US' fault.

I would agree that people in general don't know their history...but this thread originally had nothing to do with 'fault.' It was asking about this war and perceptions of this war compared to past wars...

 

[pussy+dickdenice]

Re: You just made my point again!

Yep, that's exactly what you twisted it into.

Sorry, friends & moderators. It became a slug-fest between us. I don't want it to be, as it is off topic.

But I just couldn't resist the temptation to ask, "How did I twist it?"

You may not answer this. Prof. PM me and I will revert back.

Regards

dd

 

[pussy+dickdenice]

I would agree that people in general don't know their history...but this thread originally had nothing to do with 'fault.' It was asking about this war and perceptions of this war compared to past wars...

Thanks Rogue. We were posting almost at the same time, so I didn't see your post. But that is exactly what I said a few posts above. :thumbsup: