|
Post by BobWilliston on Oct 4, 2015 1:13:36 GMT -5
Using that reasoning you can also claim that the US is keeping the peace in Canada and Australia. Australia and New Zealand would have been Japanese colonies without US support. Then you have the Japanese to thank for that. The US would never have joined in the war had the Japanese not attacked the US -- 4 years after the war started.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Oct 4, 2015 1:32:38 GMT -5
Sometimes countries need to come to some solutions by themselves without outside help. When someone else just imposes their rules on them it's not their choice so it's basically meaningless if the country imposing the rules pulls out. There needs to be solutions the people of that country come to themselves and are more able to make work because they understand the underlying dynamics better than an outside source. The States just can't win. People complain if they 'interfere' and then when they decide to stay out of it people complain that they aren't helping. The Middle East needs to solve their own problems because no one that isn't part of that culture understands the dynamics of their culture. Solutions need to come from within and the rest of the world needs to let them. Our interference hasn't helped so maybe it's time to try something else? That's how I see it anyway. Obama tried something else in Syria. With a quarter million dead, twelve million refugees, and enormous damage to the country's infrastructure, his Syria policy can hardly be considered a resounding success. Are you thinking the US has to do something, or that the US shouldn't do anything? I say, Americans have to get over the idea that they have "exceptional" ideas on how the rest of the world should be organized, and the rest of the world has to start realizing the US doesn't care for anything anywhere except their own "capitalist" interests. Ask the people in Burundi how thankful they are for US intervention. Ask the people in Burkina Faso how the US helped them put down their most recent uprising. Don't forget, it's American tax payers who are paying the bill. Our efforts have been so successful that the majority of American fatalities in Middle East warfare have been from friendly fire. Plus, Americans may be tired of paying a billion dollars a day to keep the war going. Besides that, we've just had our 194th multiple gunshot murder spree for 2015. You want to hang your national security and reputation in the world on that kind of hitching post?
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Oct 4, 2015 1:38:31 GMT -5
Do you think that "our" troops should have stayed there forever policing Iraq?
We shouldn't have had our troops there to begin with. Bush took the US into that war by telling the US that the Iraqi's were close to developing a nuclear bomb.
It was not true & he knew that! Bush even snookered Colin Powell into making that statement at the UN.
When the US troops got into Iraq, there were NO enriched uranium facilities found!US intelligence knew there wasn't any evidence of enriched uranium facilities & had fully informed Bush, -but he went ahead with the invasion anyway!
Well, we were in germany and japan keeping the peace and we've had to maintain the border of s. korea for longer... We were in Germany and Japan after wars which had been declared by both those countries on the US first! Iraq had NOT declared war on us!
As for the he Korean War, -I admit I don't know a lot about that war. My understanding it was a war between North and South Korea led by United Nations force of which the United States was one nation of several other nations assisting the South Koreans.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Oct 4, 2015 1:47:24 GMT -5
Sometimes countries need to come to some solutions by themselves without outside help. When someone else just imposes their rules on them it's not their choice so it's basically meaningless if the country imposing the rules pulls out. There needs to be solutions the people of that country come to themselves and are more able to make work because they understand the underlying dynamics better than an outside source. The States just can't win. People complain if they 'interfere' and then when they decide to stay out of it people complain that they aren't helping. The Middle East needs to solve their own problems because no one that isn't part of that culture understands the dynamics of their culture. Solutions need to come from within and the rest of the world needs to let them. Our interference hasn't helped so maybe it's time to try something else? That's how I see it anyway. Obama tried something else in Syria. With a quarter million dead, twelve million refugees, and enormous damage to the country's infrastructure, his Syria policy can hardly be considered a resounding success. You think that it would have better if the US had sent ground troops into Syria?
How many Iraqi soldiers were killed in the war started by the US? How many of the US troops were killed by the same war which WE started?
How many Iraqi 'citizens,' which included women, older non-military men & children were killed in a war which WE, the US, started in Iraq?
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Oct 4, 2015 2:00:10 GMT -5
Well, we were in germany and japan keeping the peace and we've had to maintain the border of s. korea for longer... We were in Germany and Japan after wars which had been declared by both those countries on the US first! Iraq had NOT declared war on us!
As for the he Korean War, -I admit I don't know a lot about that war. My understanding it was a war between North and South Korea led by United Nations force of which the United States was one nation of several other nations assisting the South Koreans.The US got involved in Korea at the time because of the Truman Doctrine. At the time Communism was in the process of "taking over the whole world", and President Truman announced that it was the policy of the US Government to involve itself in any country where communism may be advancing -- at the time Korea. When the French lost in Viet Nam, the US went and tried to do what the French couldn't. Just 2 examples that most people are aware of. Mind you, it never mattered what kind of government the communists were chasing out of town Reagan was the last president to operate on that principle, but by then he had to carry out secret operations because his strategy was forbidden by law -- the CIA gave guns to the rebels fighting socialist governments in Central America in exchange for illegal drugs that the sold through drug dealers in inner cities in the US. Remember, it was Reagan who instituted the War on Drugs. If anyone wants to know how the public found out about that, watch the movie Kill The Messanger. Makes one proud of American freedom of speech and law abiding leaders.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Oct 4, 2015 12:51:53 GMT -5
Obama tried something else in Syria. With a quarter million dead, twelve million refugees, and enormous damage to the country's infrastructure, his Syria policy can hardly be considered a resounding success. You think that it would have better if the US had sent ground troops into Syria?Do I think that it would have been better if the US had stopped Assad from attacking his own people? Yes!
|
|
|
Post by rational on Oct 4, 2015 15:05:21 GMT -5
Australia and New Zealand would have been Japanese colonies without US support. Then you have the Japanese to thank for that. The US would never have joined in the war had the Japanese not attacked the US -- 4 years after the war started. Curious how you arrived at 4 years. What date/event do you see as the start of WWII?
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Oct 4, 2015 16:51:39 GMT -5
Then you have the Japanese to thank for that. The US would never have joined in the war had the Japanese not attacked the US -- 4 years after the war started. Curious how you arrived at 4 years. What date/event do you see as the start of WWII? The invasion of Poland on 1 September 1939 is generally recognized in the West as the beginning of what is now called World War II. However, Japan's war of aggression started in 1937 and merged with the war in Europe later on. The US did not enter the war until Dec. 1941 when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. And because the US decided to fight back with the Japanese, Italy and Germany also declared war on the US. So what was the US doing between 1937 and 1941 -- SELLING ammunition to whoever Congress let them sell. We're capitalists, remember.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Oct 4, 2015 17:19:14 GMT -5
You think that it would have better if the US had sent ground troops into Syria? Do I think that it would have been better if the US had stopped Assad from attacking his own people? Yes! Do you think that strategy worked when Bush 43 stopped Sadam Hussein from attacking his own people?
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Oct 4, 2015 19:39:30 GMT -5
Do I think that it would have been better if the US had stopped Assad from attacking his own people? Yes! Do you think that strategy worked when Bush 43 stopped Sadam Hussein from attacking his own people? Yes, the Kurds appreciated it. The Shiites and the Kuwaitis and the other neighboring countries seem a pretty thankless lot, but clipping Saddam's wings saved them a lot of grief.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Oct 4, 2015 19:42:42 GMT -5
So what was the US doing between 1937 and 1941 -- SELLING ammunition to whoever Congress let them sell. Who did congress let them sell to?
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Oct 4, 2015 19:58:48 GMT -5
Then you have the Japanese to thank for that. The US would never have joined in the war had the Japanese not attacked the US -- 4 years after the war started. Curious how you arrived at 4 years. What date/event do you see as the start of WWII? I also have a problem with Bob's math. I guess he's doing the teacher thing - saying something wrong to see if we're awake! 1941 - 1939 = 2 From the Chinese perspective, the war started long before that.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Oct 4, 2015 21:32:21 GMT -5
Curious how you arrived at 4 years. What date/event do you see as the start of WWII? I also have a problem with Bob's math. I guess he's doing the teacher thing - saying something wrong to see if we're awake! 1941 - 1939 = 2 From the Chinese perspective, the war started long before that. Germany's occupation of Czechoslovakia in 1938 adds another year!
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Oct 4, 2015 21:59:21 GMT -5
So what was the US doing between 1937 and 1941 -- SELLING ammunition to whoever Congress let them sell. Who did congress let them sell to? Mostly to the Allies, but they weren't unanimous that the US was on the side of the Allies. Remember, German had just recently ceased to be a major language of instruction in public schools in this country.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Oct 4, 2015 22:03:08 GMT -5
Do you think that strategy worked when Bush 43 stopped Sadam Hussein from attacking his own people? Yes, the Kurds appreciated it. The Shiites and the Kuwaitis and the other neighboring countries seem a pretty thankless lot, but clipping Saddam's wings saved them a lot of grief. Oh sure, someone is always going to be pleased. A lot of people all over Europe welcomed the Nazis too. Because someone appreciates it has nothing to do with solving the "problem".
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Oct 4, 2015 22:08:14 GMT -5
Curious how you arrived at 4 years. What date/event do you see as the start of WWII? I also have a problem with Bob's math. I guess he's doing the teacher thing - saying something wrong to see if we're awake! 1941 - 1939 = 2 From the Chinese perspective, the war started long before that. You didn't read well. I was answering the suggestion that the US were johnny on the spot with help for Australia and New Zealand -- and the US DID NOT enter the war until 1943. Therefore: 1943 - 1939 = 4 And the only reason you go to the "Chinese perspective" is because Bob knew the Pacific war began before 1941.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Oct 4, 2015 22:14:42 GMT -5
I also have a problem with Bob's math. I guess he's doing the teacher thing - saying something wrong to see if we're awake! 1941 - 1939 = 2 From the Chinese perspective, the war started long before that. Germany's occupation of Czechoslovakia in 1938 adds another year! But an occupation can't really be called warfare.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Oct 4, 2015 22:29:34 GMT -5
Germany's occupation of Czechoslovakia in 1938 adds another year! But an occupation can't really be called warfare. Oh come on! The Japanese occupation of Manchuria lasted from 1931 until the end of World War II. I have a feeling the people of Manchuria view the occupation as warfare. And that gives you a 10 year window! I think a case could be made that the US entered the war by mid 1942 - at least in air raids against the axis.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Oct 4, 2015 22:37:12 GMT -5
But an occupation can't really be called warfare. Oh come on! The Japanese occupation of Manchuria lasted from 1931 until the end of World War II. I have a feeling the people of Manchuria view the occupation as warfare. And that gives you a 10 year window! I think a case could be made that the US entered the war by mid 1942 - at least in air raids against the axis. Well isn't that the story of US involvement anywhere -- a case can be made?
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Oct 4, 2015 22:50:11 GMT -5
I also have a problem with Bob's math. I guess he's doing the teacher thing - saying something wrong to see if we're awake! 1941 - 1939 = 2 From the Chinese perspective, the war started long before that. You didn't read well. I was answering the suggestion that the US were johnny on the spot with help for Australia and New Zealand -- and the US DID NOT enter the war until 1943. Therefore: 1943 - 1939 = 4 And the only reason you go to the "Chinese perspective" is because Bob knew the Pacific war began before 1941. The US entered the war in 1941. Where do you get 1943 from? PS: By "the war" I mean WW2. What war are you referring to Bob?
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Oct 4, 2015 22:56:40 GMT -5
Who did congress let them sell to? Mostly to the Allies, but they weren't unanimous that the US was on the side of the Allies. Remember, German had just recently ceased to be a major language of instruction in public schools in this country. In March 1941, Roosevelt moved further towards making the US the ‘arsenal of democracy’ with the Lend-Lease Act, which permitted the lending, leasing, selling, or bartering of arms, ammunition and food to “any country whose defence the President deems vital to the defence of the US.” www.history.co.uk/study-topics/history-of-ww2/us-entry-and-alliance
|
|
|
Post by rational on Oct 4, 2015 23:23:58 GMT -5
Oh come on! The Japanese occupation of Manchuria lasted from 1931 until the end of World War II. I have a feeling the people of Manchuria view the occupation as warfare. And that gives you a 10 year window! I think a case could be made that the US entered the war by mid 1942 - at least in air raids against the axis. Well isn't that the story of US involvement anywhere -- a case can be made? True, but in this instance there were american airmen in the planes that flew raids, England to Europe, from July 4, 1942 onward. Of course, you could still say the US had not entered the war until 1943 and I am sure your support of your claim would be interesting.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Oct 5, 2015 0:32:09 GMT -5
On December 11, 1941, the United States Congress declared war upon Germany, hours after Germany declared war on the United States.
It would take some twisted school teacher logic to get 1943 out of that.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Oct 5, 2015 0:34:14 GMT -5
We were in Germany and Japan after wars which had been declared by both those countries on the US first! Iraq had NOT declared war on us!
As for the he Korean War, -I admit I don't know a lot about that war. My understanding it was a war between North and South Korea led by United Nations force of which the United States was one nation of several other nations assisting the South Koreans. The US got involved in Korea at the time because of the Truman Doctrine. At the time Communism was in the process of "taking over the whole world", and President Truman announced that it was the policy of the US Government to involve itself in any country where communism may be advancing -- at the time Korea. When the French lost in Viet Nam, the US went and tried to do what the French couldn't. Just 2 examples that most people are aware of.
Mind you, it never mattered what kind of government the communists were chasing out of town Reagan was the last president to operate on that principle, but by then he had to carry out secret operations because his strategy was forbidden by law -- the CIA gave guns to the rebels fighting socialist governments in Central America in exchange for illegal drugs that the sold through drug dealers in inner cities in the US. Remember, it was Reagan who instituted the War on Drugs. If anyone wants to know how the public found out about that, watch the movie Kill The Messanger. Makes one proud of American freedom of speech and law abiding leaders. Yes, I did know about Reagan carrying out secret operations of the CIA, - secretly giving guns to the rebels fighting socialist governments in Central America. We knew that assassination of Óscar Arnulfo Romero y Galdáme, a prelate of the Catholic Church in El Salvado which was really about his preaching against poverty, social injustice, assassinations and torture in the government at that time.
At the same time there was the School of the Americas where the US trained mainly Latin American military officers who then went back to their own countries and committed human rights abuses, -including murders, rapes and torture contrary to the Geneva Conventions.
My husband & I were active in the Peace Movement at the time.
Yes, indeed, sometimes it does "makes one 'proud' of American law abiding leaders."
I'm just glad that at least we were able, in at least in a small part, to make the public more aware of what actually was going on. Except that for the most part the public usually would rather turn a blind eye to reality as long as they are happy & content.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Oct 5, 2015 0:46:36 GMT -5
So what was the US doing between 1937 and 1941 -- SELLING ammunition to whoever Congress let them sell. We're capitalists, remember. According to the German government, the US was against Germany ever since the outbreak of the European war.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Oct 5, 2015 1:49:23 GMT -5
I was answering the suggestion that the US were johnny on the spot with help for Australia and New Zealand -- and the US DID NOT enter the war until 1943. Therefore: 1941 - 1937 = 4 And the only reason you go to the "Chinese perspective" is because Bob knew the Pacific war began before 1937. The US entered the war in 1941. Where do you get 1943 from? PS: By "the war" I mean WW2. What war are you referring to Bob? I got a couple of dates wrong in that post. The corrected dates are I corrected in blue above. I was talking about WW2. And as you suggested, the Pacific theater of that was began in 1937. My original point was that the US was 4 years late getting into that one, in case the Aussies and Kiwis thought the US participation was any special favor to them.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Oct 5, 2015 1:52:02 GMT -5
On December 11, 1941, the United States Congress declared war upon Germany, hours after Germany declared war on the United States. It would take some twisted school teacher logic to get 1943 out of that. I only count even numbers by twos.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Oct 5, 2015 1:58:55 GMT -5
Well isn't that the story of US involvement anywhere -- a case can be made? True, but in this instance there were american airmen in the planes that flew raids, England to Europe, from July 4, 1942 onward. Of course, you could still say the US had not entered the war until 1943 and I am sure your support of your claim would be interesting. Sorry -- I was two years off with ALL dates in that post. So by 1942 the US had reacted to the Axis declaration of war on the US.
|
|