Why North Americans aren't fit to support wars

[BC_chick]

Then why did you focus on Bush and America wrt wars?

Reread my initial post, I answer this question in it.

And those who do not understand the religion of a Buddhist monk are also in a good position to say "no" to war? America tried that from 1914-1917 and 1939-1941 but those pesky Europeans and Canadians wanted us to join the war!

But of course! You justify attacking and invading a nation for breaching the no-fly zones because 60 years ago Canada and Europe wanted help in fighting a madman who was about wreak havoc on a world in which you also live.

[bush_cheney2004]

But of course! You justify attacking and invading a nation for breaching the no-fly zones because 60 years ago Canada and Europe wanted help in fighting a madman who was about wreak havoc on a world in which you also live.

You can't have it both ways....many of those same "stupid" Americans DID NOT want war for your Commonwealth Empire. Are they only smart when they support war for things you believe in?

Why is Canada in so many wars? Must be that attack way back in 1812. Oh, and there were U-boats in the St. Lawrence and those balloon bombs from Japan. War torn Canada.

[BC_chick]

You can't have it both ways....many of those same "stupid" Americans DID NOT want war for your Commonwealth Empire. Are they only smart when they support war for things you believe in?

I'm saying that peacekeeping and wars should be used as a last resort when there is an existential threat to the people of a certain part of the world (ie WWII, Darfur, or even Serbia) and/or when there is a serious threat to your own nation.

Seeing how Iraq was not a threat to the US and was not an existential threat to any of its neighbours, then I don't see how I contradict myself, nor do I see the relevance in saying people who have no clue what is going on outside their borders really should not have a say in what wars should be fought.

[bush_cheney2004]

I'm saying that peacekeeping and wars should be used as a last resort when there is an existential threat to the people of a certain part of the world (ie WWII, Darfur, or even Serbia) and/or when there is a serious threat to your own nation.

Seeing how Iraq was not a threat to the US and was not an existential threat to any of its neighbours, then I don't see how I contradict myself, nor do I see the relevance in saying people who have no clue what is going on outside their borders really should not have a say in what wars should be fought.

So you ARE saying it is a good thing when Americans support "last resort" wars for things they are equally ignorant about? Huh?

Iraq was a threat to its neighbors and several other US interests..regime change was US Public Law since 1998. President Clinton and PM Blair promptly bombed Iraq for WMD inspections. But you missed the point..."stupid" Americans said "Hell No" to Rwanda too. General Dallaire cried....Canada did nothing as well. Which begs the entire point of this thread....so what if "North Americans" don't know Tamil Tigers from Tony the Tiger?

Are you saying that only "informed" people should have a say in such matters? Good luck with that!

[PolyNewbie]

BC Chick: Are you really attempting to compare Iraq to Serbia? LOL Unlike Iraq, Serbia actually WAS an existential threat to its neighbours.

No, it wasn't. Milosevic was a nationalist and would not go along with the plans for a central banker controlled international fascist government - same as Hussein. Thats why they went to war with him. As far as the news reports on what happend in Serbia, consider that over 650,000 people have died in Iraq yet the news keeps saying 35,000. The mainstream reports on Serbia are about as close to reality as mainstream normally gets.

BC Chick: Hey, I am certainly not bashful about relating the long history of American military power and foreign policy objectives. But to isolate North America as some kind of immune Death Star is without merit.

No, its right on thye money. We are the strong arm of the IMF & World Bank. We have wars because the people that print the money want wars. You should watch this cartoon to see how the world really works: Money As Debt. Its 47 minutes long.

[BC_chick]

So you ARE saying it is a good thing when Americans support "last resort" wars for things they are equally ignorant about? Huh?

Point well-made. In the case of a justified war (defined as one where there is an existential threat to a people and/or in the safety of your own nation) then I agree, it doesn't make a difference if the people are ignorant or not of the situation.

Now show me how Saddam fits into one of those categories given the sanctions that were facing his nation.

[noahbody]

North Americans don't even know what war is because for over a 100 years "war" was always something that happened "over there" not here. Maybe if war-supporters had seen, first-hand, what it's like to have a country destroyed, to have innocent women and children killed, they would feel differently about war.

Firstly, would you not consider 911 to be an act of war? Plenty of innocent women and children killed there. Pearl Harbour was on North American soil as well.

As far as the blanket statement that North Americans do not know what war is, I think you could say many people are too self-absorbed to care what their soldiers are facing abroad. It is sad to see comanies allowing to take an extra day at xmas in lieu of Nov 11. How disrespectful.

One point the clip does make, is to always question what you hear in the media. Often, you'll hear is that Canada is a nation of peacekeeping, not war mongerers. The reality is we've never been war mongerers and most likely never will be, but we will be a nation that goes to war to achieve peace. Some believe "peacekeeping" is about entering after a conflict has ended to provide more of a maintenance role. This is not who we've (Canada) been historically.

The Korean war, Falklands and Kosovo were all wars.

[bush_cheney2004]

Point well-made. In the case of a justified war (defined as one where there is an existential threat to a people and/or in the safety of your own nation) then I agree, it doesn't make a difference if the people are ignorant or not of the situation.

Now show me how Saddam fits into one of those categories given the sanctions that were facing his nation.

The US Congress says it better than I...to wit (Iraq Liberation Act or 1998):

http://ednet.rvc.cc.il.us/~PeterR/IR/docs/IraqLib.htm

Just War proponents are guilty of the same sins as "war mongers" ....the only ones who occupy moral high ground (as if that matters) are true pacifists.

[BC_chick]

Just War proponents are guilty of the same sins as "war mongers" ....the only ones who occupy moral high ground (as if that matters) are true pacifists.

Are you really saying that there is no difference in killing in self-defense and killing for profit?

[BC_chick]

Firstly, would you not consider 911 to be an act of war?

By whom? Iraq? Certainly not.

[Wilber]

As for Korea, hey, if I'd been alive then, I would have spoken out against that too. But just because we have "precedence" of injustice in history, it doesn't mean that we should just sit by idly and let leaders do as they please.

That certainly shows your ignorance of Korea.

[sharkman]

As for Korea, hey, if I'd been alive then, I would have spoken out against that too. But just because we have "precedence" of injustice in history, it doesn't mean that we should just sit by idly and let leaders do as they please.

That certainly shows your ignorance of Korea.

Ah, the ignorance of youth, eh? BCchick really doesn't know what's what, but that don't stop her from proving it!

[BC_chick]

That certainly shows your ignorance of Korea.

And that comment, with its lack of examples, elaboration, or substance shows your ignorance. Period.

[bush_cheney2004]

Are you really saying that there is no difference in killing in self-defense and killing for profit?

No difference to the dead. Some argue that self defense and profit are the same thing. Then there is killing for "human rights"....a novel dichotomy favored in Canada....you know...Responsibility to Protect and all that jazz.

[BC_chick]

No difference to the dead. Some argue that self defense and profit are the same thing. Then there is killing for "human rights"....a novel dichotomy favored in Canada....you know...Responsibility to Protect and all that jazz.

Killing in defense and profit are the same thing? Please do elaborate.

[bush_cheney2004]

Killing in defense and profit are the same thing? Please do elaborate.

Even "defensive" wars are seldom zero sum gains. See WW2.

[Guthrie]

Wars don't offer gains, only losses - sure, there are criminals who come out of wars with wealth but criminals don't need wars to steal

[Wilber]

That certainly shows your ignorance of Korea.

And that comment, with its lack of examples, elaboration, or substance shows your ignorance. Period.

Fly into Seoul on a clear night. Below the 38th parallel is a brightly lit vibrant country. North of it is a black hole filled with starving people ruled by a despot who has a hard on for nukes. Something the South has no interest in obtaining but easily could if it chose to. It seems it wouldn't bother you if it was all like the North.

[Guthrie]

That certainly shows your ignorance of Korea.

And that comment, with its lack of examples, elaboration, or substance shows your ignorance. Period.

Fly into Seoul on a clear night. Below the 38th parallel is a brightly light vibrant country. North of it is a black hole filled with starving people ruled by a despot who has a hard on for nukes. Something the South has no interest in obtaining but easily could if it chose to. It seems it wouldn't bother you if it was all like the North.

Korea does not look, from any kind of over flight, the way it did 55 years ago. Nor was the failure of the UN to win Korean War an event which began either any sort of inevitable downfall of the communist north, nor any bright future of the south

moreover, in Korea, the north suffers from what the south benefits from -- western dollars keep the lights on in the south and the isolation enforced by western powers on the north help keep it dark and hungry

[Wilber]

Wars don't offer gains, only losses - sure, there are criminals who come out of wars with wealth but criminals don't need wars to steal

Not losing can be the biggest gain of all depending on who you are fighting. Ask Europe, China, Korea and South East Asia after WW2. South Korea after the Korean War. For some, wars are for survival, not profit. Never having been threatened with that, it can be difficult to grasp the concept.

[Wilber]

Korea does not look, from any kind of over flight, the way it did 55 years ago. Nor was the failure of the UN to win Korean War an event which began either any sort of inevitable downfall of the communist north, nor any bright future of the south

moreover, in Korea, the north suffers from what the south benefits from -- western dollars keep the lights on in the south and the isolation enforced by western powers on the north help keep it dark and hungry

The North invaded the South remember, not the other way around. UN troops (read South Korean and American) were hanging on by their fingernails at Pusan before MacArthur turned the tables at Inchon.

The South has made real efforts to reconcile with the North, they really don't like the idea of a hostile army of over a million within spitting distance of their capital. The North is the way it is because of a backward paranoid bunch of rulers to whom brutalizing their own people is preferable to losing power. North Korea could be performing like China today but for that.

[Wilber]

Korea does not look, from any kind of over flight, the way it did 55 years ago. Nor was the failure of the UN to win Korean War an event which began either any sort of inevitable downfall of the communist north, nor any bright future of the south

The downfall of the communist north is inevitable, the only reason it hasn't happened long ago is because of China, both during and after the war. No bright future for the South, what have you been smoking? The future is there. Has been for some time. You should go take a look for yourself. It's one of the strongest economies in the world. They don't need our western dollars except to buy their products and we do, by the ton.

[Guthrie]

Korea does not look, from any kind of over flight, the way it did 55 years ago. Nor was the failure of the UN to win Korean War an event which began either any sort of inevitable downfall of the communist north, nor any bright future of the south

The downfall of the communist north is inevitable, the only reason it hasn't happened long ago is because of China, both during and after the war. No bright future for the South, what have you been smoking? The future is there. Has been for some time. You should go take a look for yourself. It's one of the strongest economies in the world. They don't need our western dollars except to buy their products and we do, by the ton.

and still, Koreans come to America looking for work, every day --- and those products? where do they sell them? I suppose they need a market for them -- maybe you should try taking an objective look at the place before you start insulting people who refuse to drink the rightist kool aid

[Wilber]

and still, Koreans come to America looking for work, every day --- and those products? where do they sell them? I suppose they need a market for them -- maybe you should try taking an objective look at the place before you start insulting people who refuse to drink the rightist kool aid

Where do we sell our products? We are one of the biggest exporting countries in the world and many of our exports are sent to Asia and made into finished products which we buy back so what is your point? There are plenty of westerners working in Asia and for their companies. Did myself for 5 years. Ever heard of Hyundi, Daewoo, KIA, Samsung, LG and the list goes on? The South could buy this country. What has North Korea produced other than starving millions? Perhaps you should get your head out of your ass and go see for yourself. I have.

[Guthrie]

and still, Koreans come to America looking for work, every day --- and those products? where do they sell them? I suppose they need a market for them -- maybe you should try taking an objective look at the place before you start insulting people who refuse to drink the rightist kool aid

Where do we sell our products? We are one of the biggest exporting countries in the world and many of our exports are sent to Asia and made into finished products which we buy back so what is your point? There are plenty of westerners working in Asia and for their companies. Did myself for 5 years. Ever heard of Hyundi, Daewoo, KIA, Samsung, LG and the list goes on? The South could buy this country. What has North Korea produced other than starving millions? Perhaps you should get your head out of your ass and go see for yourself. I have.

Trade Deficit