War In The USA

[publicprotector]

As many Americans seem to support the notion of war and export of same around the World just how many Americans would welcome war if it was happening in their own country.

Having the good fortune nay luxury of not having the bloodshed and destruction of their people and nation would the average America be so pro war if they suffered as so many others have.

It is my firm belief that this total detachment from the reality of war that leeds Americans into believing its perfectly OK to attack any nation they like be they a threat or not. The average American does not know what war is like even for their own combatents never mind what it must be like to be invaded and occupide by a foreign force.

I am sure that many would soon loose this lust for mass murder and wholesale looting if they had undergone the same process.

 

[AllieBaba]

What is the last nation we attacked, genius?

 

[Toro]

What is the last nation we attacked, genius?

Are you kidding?


As for the OP, I think there is some truth to this.

 

[Diuretic]

What is the last nation we attacked, genius?

In the 20th Century, I read somewhere, only one democracy attacked another country without first being attacked. That was the US. I'm still trying to rebut that.

 

[AllieBaba]

Since the Korean War, what nation have we attacked?

 

[Diuretic]

The piece I read referenced the invasion of Iraq.

 

[RadiomanATL]

What is the last nation we attacked, genius?

Since you're obviously chumming the waters hoping to get a bite, go ahead and make your case that the United States didn't attack Iraq.

 

[AllieBaba]

We aren't at war with Iraq. We helped Iraqis establish a democratic government, oust a tyrant, and fight against those primarily non-Iraqis who are tearing her apart.

Is that all?

 

[RadiomanATL]

We aren't at war with Iraq. We helped Iraqis establish a democratic government, oust a tyrant, and fight against those primarily non-Iraqis who are tearing her apart.

Is that all?

All of that is true, however that doesn't make the case that we did not attack Iraq.

Big difference between what happened in '03 and what is going on now.

 

[AllieBaba]

We never attacked Iraq. We attacked Saddam, and we remain to prevent terrorists from assuming his place.

We train their police, they have asked us repeatedly to stay.

 

[AllieBaba]

And the fact that Iraqis continue to serve as policemen despite being targeted by the terrorists shows we are not waging war against "Iraq".

 

[RadiomanATL]

We never attacked Iraq. We attacked Saddam,

You're not going to get any traction with that one.

 

[AllieBaba]

Iraq seems to agree with me. I'll go with them.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Iraq seems to agree with me. I'll go with them.

Too bad logic doesn't.

 

[Missourian]

What is the last nation we attacked, genius?

In the 20th Century, I read somewhere, only one democracy attacked another country without first being attacked. That was the US. I'm still trying to rebut that.

Fauklands War...Argentina attacked the United Kingdom, 1982?

I can't remember if Argentina was a Republic yet or not.

 

[Diuretic]

What is the last nation we attacked, genius?

In the 20th Century, I read somewhere, only one democracy attacked another country without first being attacked. That was the US. I'm still trying to rebut that.

Fauklands War...Argentina attacked the United Kingdom, 1982?

I can't remember if Argentina was a Republic yet or not.

Just two points. Republic/Constitutional Monarchy etc. not relevant to this, that's a discussion about forms of democratic government.

Argentina wasn't a democracy, it was ruled by a military junta.

I'll keep looking for that rebuttal.

 

[Missourian]

In the 20th Century, I read somewhere, only one democracy attacked another country without first being attacked. That was the US. I'm still trying to rebut that.

Fauklands War...Argentina attacked the United Kingdom, 1982?

I can't remember if Argentina was a Republic yet or not.

Just two points. Republic/Constitutional Monarchy etc. not relevant to this, that's a discussion about forms of democratic government.

Argentina wasn't a democracy, it was ruled by a military junta.

I'll keep looking for that rebuttal.

How long has the UK been a Constitutional Monarchy?

20th Century Atlas - Alphabetical List of War, Massacre, Tyranny and Genocide

 

[Diuretic]

Fauklands War...Argentina attacked the United Kingdom, 1982?

I can't remember if Argentina was a Republic yet or not.

Just two points. Republic/Constitutional Monarchy etc. not relevant to this, that's a discussion about forms of democratic government.

Argentina wasn't a democracy, it was ruled by a military junta.

I'll keep looking for that rebuttal.

How long has the UK been a Constitutional Monarchy?

20th Century Atlas - Alphabetical List of War, Massacre, Tyranny and Genocide

It goes back to the Civil War I think, the struggle between Charles I and the Parliament.

 

[steeliniraq]

As many Americans seem to support the notion of war and export of same around the World just how many Americans would welcome war if it was happening in their own country.

Having the good fortune nay luxury of not having the bloodshed and destruction of their people and nation would the average America be so pro war if they suffered as so many others have.

It is my firm belief that this total detachment from the reality of war that leeds Americans into believing its perfectly OK to attack any nation they like be they a threat or not. The average American does not know what war is like even for their own combatents never mind what it must be like to be invaded and occupide by a foreign force.

I am sure that many would soon loose this lust for mass murder and wholesale looting if they had undergone the same process.

Whats interesting about your post is most Americans didn't have any thrist for "mass murder and wholesale looting" until we were attacked on 9/11. Please explain that?

 

[Diuretic]

What's interesting about the post is the central thesis that if the United States were a country that had more historical experience of domestic invasion and occupation and continued war on its soil (with other nations) and on the soil of other nations, it would be less inclined to favour war as an instrument of foreign policy.

I'm not sure if the thesis is valid. It hasn't stopped many European countries from going at it, especially those with empire and colonies.

But the point "Whats interesting about your post is most Americans didn't have any thrist for "mass murder and wholesale looting" until we were attacked on 9/11." is also interesting. Americans, like any other nation, have accepted war as an instrument of foreign policy. I don't see any bloodlust in that, just an acknowledgement that war gets things done, especially if you want to conquer other nations and grab their resources when they won't trade. 9/11 though wasn't war, it was a terrorist attack, not an attack by another nation. The initial response, to go after al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, was reasonable and not out of bloodlust. It was out of a sense of revenge (again, perfectly reasonable) and to bring justice to the criminal perpetrators.

The invasion of Iraq, using 9/11 as a pretext, to grab Iraqi oil, was no different to what any other imperial power has done throughout history.

So I can only conclude that, in this area, Americans are no worse and no better than anyone else.