|
|
#61
09-05-2007, 03:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Thread for Opponents of Iraq War: \"Why\"?
If good people were in charge, I would support the Iraq war. However, there is no 20th century president or major political figure who falls into this category. Basically, the war would need to be run on every level by self-sacrificing idealists of the highest qualifications and standards.
|
|
#62
09-05-2007, 01:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Thread for Opponents of Iraq War: \"Why\"?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] When the USA stays dedicated (American revolution, WWI, WWII, Korea) there are positive results. When the people don't care or don't go the distance (Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq I, Somolia) there are negative results. [/ QUOTE ] Your classification is incorrect: the US pulled out early in WW1 and Korea. You left out War of 1812, Spanish American War, Philippine Insurrection, the Bay of Pigs, and Beirut (among others). The U.S. starts too many wars to see them all through to the finish. [/ QUOTE ] I don't know enough about the other conflicts or wars to comment on them. The US didn't pull out of WWI early, it joined it late. The Bay of Pigs is another prime examle of the US not staying committed and messing things up.
|
|
#63
09-05-2007, 07:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Thread for Opponents of Iraq War: \"Why\"?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] When the USA stays dedicated (American revolution, WWI, WWII, Korea) there are positive results. When the people don't care or don't go the distance (Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq I, Somolia) there are negative results. [/ QUOTE ] Your classification is incorrect: the US pulled out early in WW1 and Korea. You left out War of 1812, Spanish American War, Philippine Insurrection, the Bay of Pigs, and Beirut (among others). The U.S. starts too many wars to see them all through to the finish. [/ QUOTE ] Yea, but we did a great job of slaughtering 250k Philippinos in the name of christianity.
|
|
#64
09-05-2007, 10:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Thread for Opponents of Iraq War: \"Why\"?
[ QUOTE ]
If good people were in charge, I would support the Iraq war. However, there is no 20th century president or major political figure who falls into this category. Basically, the war would need to be run on every level by self-sacrificing idealists of the highest qualifications and standards. [/ QUOTE ] Just to be clear: So if you thought the people in charge were saints, but fulfilled the mission of the US coalition in terms of ousting Saddam and instituting a democracy among other nation building efforts, the war would become supportable in a positive sense? What specific factors would need to change to decisively effect your transition from opposition to support? What on the ground do you expect to change should more selfless, genuine people be leading the war?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
