Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 168
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
Can you show me any country that was invaded for minding its own business?

In no particular order and certainly not complete....

Lithuania

Estonia

Latvia

Poland

Czechoslavkia

Hungary

Norway

Denmark

Ethiopia

China

Indonesia

Malaysia

Mongolia

Austria

Yugoslavia

Greece

Albania

To name but a few

While some had been invaded more than once...

I think the claim can be based on the proven ineffectiveness of projecting power abroad.

cite please. I mean some proof other than what you feel when you hug your cat.

RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS

If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us

Posted
Sure...Serbia, Panama, Cuba, Dominica, Haiti, Granada, China, Korea......

My list is bigger....

RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS

If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us

Posted
Sure...Serbia, Panama, Cuba, Dominica, Haiti, Granada, China, Korea......

So you're saying Serbia, Panama, Cuba, Dominica, Haiti, Granada, China, Korea were invaded because they refused to project their power abroad and chose to mind their own business instead?

I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical,
a liberal, oh fanatical criminal

Posted
My list is bigger....

So you're saying your list was invaded too because they refused to project their power abroad and chose to mind their own business instead?

I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical,
a liberal, oh fanatical criminal

Posted
So you're saying Serbia, Panama, Cuba, Dominica, Haiti, Granada, China, Korea were invaded because they refused to project their power abroad and chose to mind their own business instead?

No, I'm saying they were invaded according to your silly question:

Can you show me any country that was invaded for minding its own business?

All were minding their own business, but it didn't help much!

Economics trumps Virtue. 

 

Posted
So you're saying your list was invaded too because they refused to project their power abroad and chose to mind their own business instead?

I didn't realize it was a 2 part stupid question.

Why do you think China was Invaded? Why do you think Lativia was invaded?

But to be accurate, countries that project power and mind their own business rarely get invaded....

RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS

If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us

Posted
...But to be accurate, countries that project power and mind their own business rarely get invaded....

True...nothing like a good old fashioned invasion to see the pitfalls of just "minding your own business".

Better keep an eye on big bad Denmark!

Economics trumps Virtue. 

 

Posted
True...nothing like a good old fashioned invasion to see the pitfalls of just "minding your own business".

Better keep an eye on big bad Denmark!

Can anyone think of a nation that minded it's own business better than Latvia? How about Austria? .....

RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS

If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us

Posted

To be accurate, both of you typically avoided an inconvenient question thereby answering it in the process. None of the countries mentioned were invaded for minding their own business. Please note I did suggest we arm ourselves with nukes to deter an invasion. Countries that arm themselves with nukes that mind their own business don't get invaded at all. Countries with or without nukes that stick their nose's in other people's business on the other hand only get themselves into a world of trouble.

I'm all for having a big stick on hand. I just think we need to keep that hand in our own pocket with legislation that spells out our neutrality and that restricts the ability of the government to stick its nose in other people's business.

Lets be even more specific. Show me the country that was invaded for not projecting its power abroad.

I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical,
a liberal, oh fanatical criminal

Posted (edited)
To be accurate, both of you typically avoided an inconvenient question thereby answering it in the process. None of the countries mentioned were invaded for minding their own business.

No, in typical fashion, your question was half baked and imprecise.

Please note I did suggest we arm ourselves with nukes to deter an invasion. Countries that arm themselves with nukes that mind their own business don't get invaded at all.

Really? You mean like the nuclear armed United Kingdom's Falkland Islands (Las Malvinas)....invaded by Argentina in 1982? Whose business were they minding instead?

Countries with or without nukes that stick their nose's in other people's business on the other hand only get themselves into a world of trouble.

Hard to avoid that...the world is a lot of trouble.

I'm all for having a big stick on hand. I just think we need to keep that hand in our own pocket with legislation that spells out our neutrality and that restricts the ability of the government to stick its nose in other people's business.

Great...but there is only one vote to a customer.

Edited by bush_cheney2004

Economics trumps Virtue. 

 

Posted
there is only one vote to a customer.

Lets have it then. Put the vote to go to war in another country to the people.

I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical,
a liberal, oh fanatical criminal

Posted
To be accurate, both of you typically avoided an inconvenient question thereby answering it in the process.

Actually to be slightly accurate I answered a stupid question. To be entirely accurate, I answered a retarded question.

None of the countries mentioned were invaded for minding their own business.

Moving the goal posts won't make a stupid question sound bright, just makes you look foolish. But to humour the intellectually challenged, here's a candy, yes they weren't invaded because the were minding their own business, but they were minding their on business anyway.

Please note I did suggest we arm ourselves with nukes to deter an invasion.

Another reason to be non PC and laugh at you.

RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS

If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us

Posted
To be accurate, both of you typically avoided an inconvenient question thereby answering it in the process.

Actually to be slightly accurate I answered a stupid question. To be entirely accurate, I answered a retarded question.

None of the countries mentioned were invaded for minding their own business.

Moving the goal posts won't make a stupid question sound bright, just makes you look foolish. But to humour the intellectually challenged, here's a candy, yes they weren't invaded because the were minding their own business, but they were minding their on business anyway.

Please note I did suggest we arm ourselves with nukes to deter an invasion.

Another reason to be non PC and laugh at you.

RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS

If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us

Posted (edited)

Technically you could be correct eyeball, I don't know of any country where an aggressor has said "hey! They're minding there own buisness, lets invade them because of it". However, plenty of countries have been minding there own busness and been invaded anyway, so in that aspect you are hugely incorrect.

I would think the classic example of Poland would illustrate this quite nicely. The list is actually very extensive when you look at it.

As for Nukes, they are not effective at all except for devastating anihilation, MAD is now perceived as being an invalid method by most military experts, this is why the shift is swinging away from Nukes and back to more conventional forces instead.

Edited by AngusThermopyle

I yam what I yam - Popeye

Posted
Technically you could be correct eyeball, I don't know of any country where an aggressor has said "hey! They're minding there own buisness, lets invade them because of it".

Thank you. That said I'll bet more than a few people have been rounded up, arrested and killed for refusing to pick up a gun or otherwise promoting peace in country's that are looking for excuses to invade someone else.

As for Nukes, they are not effective at all except for devastating anihilation, MAD is now perceived as being an invalid method by most military experts, this is why the shift is swinging away from Nukes and back to more conventional forces instead.

I'm not surprised military experts are saying this, they've probably come to realize that MAD might actually kill the military-industrial goose.

I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical,
a liberal, oh fanatical criminal

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      11,016
    • Most Online
      2,945

    Newest Member
    eninn
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...