Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
America Needs A War  
User currently offlinePilot1113 From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 2333 posts, RR: 12
Posted (13 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 620 times:

I believe that America needs a war to truly purge the divide that has arisen since this election.

"Wars solve problems," as my history teacher once told my class.

What I'm talking about is a war much like WWII, where we were deliberately attacked and the entire country rallied to victory. Political divisions were set aside as everyone united to destory "evil."

I think this probably belongs under the patriotism topic, as everyone who served in that war was a true patriot. Unlike other wars since then when the military was used as pawns in a political chess game, filling only some politican's perverted goals.

Contrary to popular beliefs, the Gulf War wasn't for money (although that was a secondary objective). The main reason was because, as a member nation of the UN, one of our fellow nations was being threatened. Bush felt that we needed to step up and defend our "friend" in their time of need. He was fufilling one of the charters of the UN, the one that says that members shall look out for each other.

He was trying do what the League of Nations failed to do during the Rhinelands conflict.

I'm still undecided as to where the Gulf War shall go. I don't know if it was a good thing or a bad thing.

- Neil Harrison

55 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinePilot1113 From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 2333 posts, RR: 12
Reply 1, posted (13 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 466 times:

What I neglected to say was that we need a common goal to shoot for.

Nothing rallies people together more than mounting a war to defeat a clearly defined "evil." (No one today argues that Germany, Italy and Japan were good, but misunderstood nations.)

- Neil Harrison


User currently offlineIainhol From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (13 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 464 times:

What dumb thing to say 'America needs war' war kills many people and effects the world! The world needs more peace and less war! There is far to much hatred in the world today, we need to get along!!
I highly recommend you picking up the book, called 'behind the picture' it is all about the life of the girl in the photo (the one after she was attacked by Napalm, and was running down the streets with no cloths on) from Vietnam. Then you might see how distructive war really is.
I am shocked that you would come up with such a topic like this, speak to any veteran about life during war, and hopefully you will see that war is not good, but destroys many things including innocent peoples live!
I wish people could just get along and be happy!
Iain


User currently offlineDG_pilot From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 856 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (13 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 452 times:

I agree. I said something to this effect once before, but was attacked myself.

A long, hard, bitter, but cleary victorious, war would do us good.....

I compare it to pruning a tree.

-Dustin


User currently offlineRai From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (13 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 450 times:

This is one of the stupidest things I've read. Obviously, you have hoarded so much knowledge in your teenage years that makes you an expert on foreign events and American politics. I think the scariest thing of all is that you even have the fortitude to proudly sign your name after writing such dreck. If it so happened that something this idiotic eked out of my brain, I'd stick my head in the sand and never take it out. I suggest you do the same.

First off, this country isn't as divided as you'd like it to be. 80% of the populace is pretty moderate. They couldn't give two shits over who is President. I would have thought that the low voter turnout would have clued you in, but I guess I had too high expectations. The "divided" troupes you allude to only represent 20% of the population, yet it is this 20% that is the most vocal.

Secondly, Bush knew ahead of time that Iraq was going to invade Kuwait. Sadam Hussein met with the U.S. ambassador to Iraq and explained his intention. Hussein was upset that the Kuwaitis were stealing oil from Iraqi reserves by some special drilling procedure. He wanted this to stop and his method of doing so was by annexing the Kuwaiti oil refineries that processed this stolen oil. Obviously, he got a bit carried away when he went all the way down to Kuwait City. Point is, Bush knew what was going to happen and gave his OK. Not that Sadam is a saint, but there are two sides to this.

Personally, I think the Gulf War was an effort to save a fledgling Presidency. His popularity was at an all-time low and he thought this would give him the needed boost. It didn’t work and he was rightfully booted out. Serves him right for publicly bickering with Greenspan and lying about the Gulf War and other things.


User currently offlineDG_pilot From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 856 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (13 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 440 times:

Rai get off your horse. Its not like I said that I was going to go looking for a war to get in or anything. I simply stated that it would help 'prune' us if you will.

-Dustin


User currently offlineRai From Canada, joined Feb 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (13 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 442 times:

Dustin: I was talking to the "all-knowing" Neil Harrison, not you. When I wrote this, there were no responses yet.

User currently offlineSteman From Germany, joined Aug 2000, 1320 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (13 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 443 times:

Hi,
I live in a Country (Italy) where patriotic feelings are extinct since the fascism was defeated but I think we really need it to face all the nation's problem. I agree with you Pilot1113 that America would need a tragic event to make people join but I really hope a war won't be necessary.
I am not an idealist, I think the Gulf war was fought for the oil and it is a good reason to me. I really hope no more war will be fought but I know this is impossible. What worries me is that America is much less powerful since the end of the Cold War: they reduced a lot their armed forces and seem to be too confident about thw world situation but many Nations would like to defeat America and force it the stay away from their interests. I am talking about China, India and Iran for example.
In a Tom Clancy's novel an American aircraft carrier was destroyed by an enemy nation. I hope Usa won't need to experience such a thing to understand that they don't have to be less powerful if they still want to be the World leading nation as they deserve to be (together with their allies, Italy included)

ciao

Stefano


User currently offlineDG_pilot From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 856 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (13 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 440 times:

I offer my apology for jumping to arms. Sorry, I was mistaken.

-Dustin


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (13 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 446 times:

While some of the lnguage may be crude, and not all the aspects well thought out, Pilot1113's basic premise does have a grain of truth to it.

Politically, There is no need for another war. True enough, conflict has been used as a tool to distract people from their domestic woes - not only all-out war, but also simple hate-mongering. Examples abound in the 20th century, including Hitler's targeting of Jews, Argentina's invasion of the Falklands, etc. These were mainly provoked by massive economic problems on the home front. There is no such condition present in the U.S.. Rai is correct in saying that most people are pretty much indifferent as to who won the election.

The Gulf War was caused by one internationally recognized country and U.N. member - Kuwait, being invaded and annexed by another country (unlike, say Chechnya). If the U.N. and all the countries that were allied to Kuwait were ever to be considered seriously, a response had to be made and Iraq not allowed to hold on to those gains. The idea that the Bush Administration knew that Saddam would make such an attempt is bull. The U.S. Ambassador screwed up, both in what she understood and what she said. The U.N. also screwed up (IMHO) by not allowing the allied forces to drive on to Baghdad and jail Saddam.

War has had another purpose in the world, second only to disease - population control. Right now the population is doubling every 30 or 40 years. Wars and pestulance kept it down until the last century, but now we have had no major wars in almost 60 years, and with the advent of antibiotics and other medicines, the population is exploding. How long can this population growth be kept up?

Charles


User currently offline9A-CRO From Croatia, joined Jun 2000, 1574 posts, RR: 8
Reply 10, posted (13 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 422 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

Pilot113 - you are an idiot - I live in country that was in war several years ago - and I say - it isn't fun - (fortunatrely I live in part of that it that wasn't icluded directly in conflict)

it isn't so fun to run in shelter , have your home destroyed, family slaughtered - go to Sarajevo and start telling what you said I see how people will react

CFalk - population control - it is so easy to say that - if you aren't included in that - I think that you would have a very, very differemt opinion if Switzerland was nuked

population control - when there is high standard there is no big growth in population - people in poor countries want many children to support them when they ar older



MAKE LOVE NOT WAR



When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward...
User currently offlineN766AS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (13 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 413 times:

I agree- a war would be for the better for America for many reasons.
First, and obviously, the economy booms during times of war. And with this recession we are coming up on, it really couldn't hurt.
Second, as Neil said, it would unite the nation and, that too, wouldn't hurt right now.

>Pilot113 - you are an idiot - I live in country that was in war several years ago - and I say - it isn't fun

Are wars ever fought on American soil? Barely. You can say Pearl Harbor, but really- do we ever fight on our land? Its a fact- our nation does better during wartime....


User currently offlineLHMark From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 7255 posts, RR: 48
Reply 12, posted (13 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 406 times:

Well, there was that pesky civil war, the reverberations and latent hostilities of which can still be felt today.

National unity does not justify the sacrifice of a SINGLE life.

I wonder if, in Munich in the '20s, a failed painter turned politican ever commented over his hefe-weizen that Germany needed a war...



"Sympathy is something that shouldn't be bestowed on the Yankees. Apparently it angers them." - Bob Feller
User currently offlineIainhol From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (13 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 401 times:

I think too many people in here are far to selfish. You do not start war to solve your own problems! It seems that the people who like the idea (N755AS, DG_pilot and Pilot 1113) are all to young to have experienced the effects of war!
I think everyone who likes the idea of war are absolute assholes! The world needs more people who can get a long, be happy, and think of others. The world does not need people who are selfish, unhappy, like some of our forum members.
Iain


User currently offlineN766AS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (13 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 394 times:

>National unity does not justify the sacrifice of a SINGLE life

You are correct. But if we were thrust into a war, that would be one positive side effect.

Iain, I do not necessarily like the idea of war, but I was commenting that war does have its positive sides, i.e. an economic boom. As I said in the email, I think that war is not to be used as a solution to an economic depression. Look at WWII and the depression. The reason the USA pulled out of the depression wasn't Roosevelt's ABC programs, rather World War II. I am NOT trying to say we should start a war (damn, I have to say this way too many times), but if a war was started, it would reap good things for the United States of America. No, risking the lives of servicemen that put their lives on the line for the liberty and freedom of this great nation is NOT WORTH an economic "boom".


User currently offlineIainhol From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (13 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 385 times:

N766AS and DG_Pilot thanks for talking the time to e-mail me, I do understand where you guys are coming from. However I think that the death and distruction of war is far worse then then the economical benifits. Also at this time anything I wrote about or to you guys I would like to apologize. I did not see your point and was quite upset about the post, and my fingers (not mouth this time) might have got the better of me!
All the best,
Iain


User currently offlineFlight152 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 3369 posts, RR: 6
Reply 16, posted (13 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 381 times:

I completly agree with Iainhol, N766AS- WWII was not the reason the US was pulled out of the depression, it was Rooselvelts committment to building projects like the Grand Culie Dam, The Panama Canal... The depression was almost over by the time of WWII. The only reason people are talking about a ression is Bush is saying there is one comming is so he can "save the US and look like the good guy". Is it worth starting a war??

User currently offlineDG_pilot From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 856 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (13 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 374 times:

Apology accepted Iain. Don't worry about it at all. I have done the same thing too. It happens to the best of us!  

-Dustin


User currently offlineTrvlr From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 4430 posts, RR: 22
Reply 18, posted (13 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 374 times:

No. Public opinion is too diverse for any good to come out of a Gulf or Kosovo type conflict. The only way public opinion could be unified in a patriotic direction is if the United States was attacked directly, something which is definitely not a good thing.

Aaron G.


User currently offlineChris28_17 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 1439 posts, RR: 10
Reply 19, posted (13 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 369 times:

I see both sides for sure. I think, although war would probably knock reality into alot of heads, it is a bit extreme. Whoever it was that called it "pruning", i do see that philosophy.

I just think thats its pretty sad that people have lost so much integrity in america that we need something as drastic as a war to to set them straight.

Besides, clinton tried his darndest to start a few wars and it didnt do anything but kill a few hundred american soldiers...

What america needs is a total restructuring of its morals, values, and priorities. This WILL happen one way or the other eventually, lets just hope that it doesnt take a war to get it done.. hopefully we can do it ourself.


CHRIS


User currently offlineDG_pilot From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 856 posts, RR: 2
Reply 20, posted (13 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 366 times:

You are mistaken. The Panama Canal had been completely finished for quite some time before the Depression. Forthere, it could NOT have pulled us out of the Depression. It was completed in 1915.

It was under Teddy Roosevelt that the Canal was began, not Franklin D. Roosevelt, who helped bring us out of the Depression.

-Dustin