M.Dancer Posted August 18, 2008 Report Posted August 18, 2008 1812 - isn't that when US invaded Canada?1942 - US was attacked, not invaded. It is hard to appreciate the price of peace when you have not really experienced war. 1812-How was Washington and other US cities burned then? 1941- The US was attacked...they were invaded in 1942 Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
PoliticalCitizen Posted August 18, 2008 Author Report Posted August 18, 2008 1812-How was Washington and other US cities burned then?1941- The US was attacked...they were invaded in 1942 1812 - US fighting UK and Canada is more like a civil war - people fighting same people speaking same language... very much unlike Germany invading USSR 1942 - Which part of US got invaded? Quote You are what you do.
M.Dancer Posted August 18, 2008 Report Posted August 18, 2008 1812 - US fighting UK and Canada is more like a civil war - people fighting same people speaking same language... very much unlike Germany invading USSR1942 - Which part of US got invaded? 1812--that's just stupid 1942--Alaska Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
PoliticalCitizen Posted August 18, 2008 Author Report Posted August 18, 2008 1812--that's just stupid1942--Alaska The 2 exceptions you provided just reinforce my point. How many countries did US invade? There was no real war that US fought on its territory against a FOREIGN (as opposed to Motherland - UK) enemy force that would have killed civilians, destroyed cities, created concentration camps and sought full extermination for american people. This is why engaging in wars is so easy for US - they are always fought on "enemy" territory, it is the "enemy" civilians that are killed and displaced, "enemy" infrastructure... The only problem with that is the list of the "Enemies" or potential "Enemies" is growing and the NATO partners are dragged into US oil struggle... Some of them are saying no, so for Iraq it was "Coalition of the Willing" to commit a crime... Quote You are what you do.
M.Dancer Posted August 18, 2008 Report Posted August 18, 2008 Some of them are saying no, so for Iraq it was "Coalition of the Willing" to commit a crime... What crime was that? Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
PoliticalCitizen Posted August 18, 2008 Author Report Posted August 18, 2008 What crime was that? Invading a sovereign country that did not attack US or kill US citizens. Quote You are what you do.
M.Dancer Posted August 18, 2008 Report Posted August 18, 2008 Invading a sovereign country that did not attack US or kill US citizens. That isn't a crime. If it was, Russia would have been in gaol years ago.... Hungary Poland Czecholslovia Afghanistan..... Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
PoliticalCitizen Posted August 18, 2008 Author Report Posted August 18, 2008 That isn't a crime. If it was, Russia would have been in gaol years ago....Hungary Poland Czecholslovia Afghanistan..... Just because there are many murderers doesn't mean murdering is not against the law (or international law). Quote You are what you do.
GostHacked Posted August 18, 2008 Report Posted August 18, 2008 Sure, i guess history is written differently in Russia.... History is not made by the people who were right. It was made by those people that were left. Wars do not determine who was right, only who is left. The US has their view of the war. The Russians have theirs. Which one is right? Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 19, 2008 Report Posted August 19, 2008 Invading a sovereign country that did not attack US or kill US citizens. Ha! I like this game.....Iraq attacked USS Stark and killed US citizens.....your move comrade. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
PoliticalCitizen Posted August 19, 2008 Author Report Posted August 19, 2008 Ha! I like this game.....Iraq attacked USS Stark and killed US citizens.....your move comrade. I guess the American rules of engagement changed since 1987... Quote You are what you do.
DogOnPorch Posted August 19, 2008 Report Posted August 19, 2008 (edited) There was no real war that US fought on its territory against a FOREIGN (as opposed to Motherland - UK) enemy force that would have killed civilians, destroyed cities, created concentration camps and sought full extermination for american people. The War in Russia and the War in the Pacific/Asia were apples and oranges. They can't really be compared in the same way. However, Midway and Stalingrad together pretty much put the Axis on the defensive for strategic purposes. Russia has never had the natural obstacles to keep out attackers from the west...or east for that matter. It was always the same deal...trade space for time. Either an army will be raised or winter will set in...or both. The odd railway gauge in use by the Russians was infact the largest barrier to the German advance those first two summers ('41-'42). All supplies needed to be trucked (or 'wagoned' as the case may be) from the furthest German gauge railhead. Conversion took time as you might imagine...and the roads were often horrible. ------------------------------------------ Logistics is the ball and chain of armored warfare. ---Generaloberst Heinz Guderian Edited August 19, 2008 by DogOnPorch Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
jbg Posted August 19, 2008 Report Posted August 19, 2008 As is the history of any country formed more than 200 some years ago. My views on English-speaking bloodshed here (link). Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
jbg Posted August 19, 2008 Report Posted August 19, 2008 1812-How was Washington and other US cities burned then?1941- The US was attacked...they were invaded in 1942 You left out 2001; September 11. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
PoliticalCitizen Posted August 19, 2008 Author Report Posted August 19, 2008 The War in Russia and the War in the Pacific/Asia were apples and oranges. They can't really be compared in the same way. However, Midway and Stalingrad together pretty much put the Axis on the defensive for strategic purposes. Russia has never had the natural obstacles to keep out attackers from the west...or east for that matter. It was always the same deal...trade space for time. Either an army will be raised or winter will set in...or both. The odd railway gauge in use by the Russians was infact the largest barrier to the German advance those first two summers ('41-'42). All supplies needed to be trucked (or 'wagoned' as the case may be) from the furthest German gauge railhead. Conversion took time as you might imagine...and the roads were often horrible. ------------------------------------------ Logistics is the ball and chain of armored warfare. ---Generaloberst Heinz Guderian Interesting details and analysis, thanks. It does not change the fact that there was no real invasion of US or Canada. Of course, this fact compliments US military might. But it does not teach the voters who support war the real price of war... Quote You are what you do.
PoliticalCitizen Posted August 19, 2008 Author Report Posted August 19, 2008 My views on English-speaking bloodshed here (link). Wow... that may be the worst anti-US rant I've read... I do not hate US and do not agree with the rant. You want to hear which national anthem is really brutal? French Marseillaise: "...Let their impure blood irrigate our furrows..." Jeez! Quote You are what you do.
PoliticalCitizen Posted August 19, 2008 Author Report Posted August 19, 2008 You left out 2001; September 11. Yes, there was an attack on 9/11... but it was not an aggression and even less an invasion... Quote You are what you do.
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 19, 2008 Report Posted August 19, 2008 I guess the American rules of engagement changed since 1987... And how....the best defense is a strong offense. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
DogOnPorch Posted August 19, 2008 Report Posted August 19, 2008 Interesting details and analysis, thanks. You're welcome. It does not change the fact that there was no real invasion of US or Canada. Maybe so. However the American Civil War sure tore through the place. Entire US cities were destroyed in detail. The battles were also horrific. At Antietam, for example, 23,000 casualties in one day of fighting. One of the first examples of Total War was Sherman's March to the Sea. Of course, this fact compliments US military might. But it does not teach the voters who support war the real price of war... Plenty enough Americans know of war's nature to comment on it. Canadian's, too. --------------------------------------- It's my party and I'll cry if I want to--cry if I want to--cry if I want to. You would cry too if it happened to you! ---Leslie Gore Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 19, 2008 Report Posted August 19, 2008 (edited) ...Of course, this fact compliments US military might. But it does not teach the voters who support war the real price of war... Sure it does...the US believes in giving rather than receiving when it comes to "invasions". That includes Mother Russia (North Russia Campaign). Who do you think pays for this? Edited August 19, 2008 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
M.Dancer Posted August 19, 2008 Report Posted August 19, 2008 Just because there are many murderers doesn't mean murdering is not against the law (or international law). If there were any international laws broken, there would be charges or at very least, the UNSC would condemn the actions instead of condoning the invasion of Iraq. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
GostHacked Posted August 19, 2008 Report Posted August 19, 2008 Russia has never had the natural obstacles to keep out attackers from the west...or east for that matter. It was always the same deal...trade space for time. Either an army will be raised or winter will set in...or both. The odd railway gauge in use by the Russians was infact the largest barrier to the German advance those first two summers ('41-'42). All supplies needed to be trucked (or 'wagoned' as the case may be) from the furthest German gauge railhead. Conversion took time as you might imagine...and the roads were often horrible. Hitler took a huge gamble and lost. He had diverted forces to the south to capture the USSR's oil fields at that time. This delayed the attack on Moscow by a couple months. His supply chain was long and weak, and most German soldiers were not prepared for the harsh winter. Supplies did not get to them. This probably is one of the biggest mistakes Hitler made in the war. JBG You left out 2001; September 11. This was a terrorist attack. This was not an invasion. DogonPorch Maybe so. However the American Civil War sure tore through the place. Entire US cities were destroyed in detail. Civil War... again no foreign invading forces. BC Sure it does...the US believes in giving rather than receiving when it comes to "invasions". That includes Mother Russia (North Russia Campaign). Who do you think pays for this? Everyone is paying for it. Everyone. M Dancer. If there were any international laws broken, there would be charges or at very least, the UNSC would condemn the actions instead of condoning the invasion of Iraq. When you have a seat at the UNSC and have huge veto power, all this means nothing. Quote
M.Dancer Posted August 19, 2008 Report Posted August 19, 2008 M Dancer.When you have a seat at the UNSC and have huge veto power, all this means nothing. Be so kind as to show the UNSC resolution that was defeated or vetoed. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
White Doors Posted August 19, 2008 Report Posted August 19, 2008 The 2 exceptions you provided just reinforce my point.How many countries did US invade? There was no real war that US fought on its territory against a FOREIGN (as opposed to Motherland - UK) enemy force that would have killed civilians, destroyed cities, created concentration camps and sought full extermination for american people. This is why engaging in wars is so easy for US - they are always fought on "enemy" territory, it is the "enemy" civilians that are killed and displaced, "enemy" infrastructure... The only problem with that is the list of the "Enemies" or potential "Enemies" is growing and the NATO partners are dragged into US oil struggle... Some of them are saying no, so for Iraq it was "Coalition of the Willing" to commit a crime... Umm.. The US civil war was one of the bloodiest wars of all time.. but whatever, if the enemy doesn't have slanted eyes I guess it doesn't count as a 'real war' in yoru books eh? speaking of books, you should try reading some. preferably the History one's. Quote Those Dern Rednecks done outfoxed the left wing again.~blueblood~
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 19, 2008 Report Posted August 19, 2008 Be so kind as to show the UNSC resolution that was defeated or vetoed. Very astute point, as none was tendered, not even from the General Assembly. In fact, the UNSC sanctioned the occupation and transition to domestic rule in Iraq with several resolutions. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
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.