Rasputin_Vol
"Slava Ukraina"
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2007
- Messages
- 72,056
- Likes
- 39,844
I'm not going to touch morals but wreckless is 100% correct. Here's to spending more money, risking more lives, and killing more foreign civilians. And for what? The rest of the world is soon going to get tired of all this...
The rest of the world has been tired of us for quite some time. I think the country is waking up to the fact that people don't like us very much.
I think Americans have been tired for some time.
10 years in Iraq, 11 years in Afghanistan, both are in turmoil.
What have we accomplished in 10+ years of war?
We should have gone into Afghanistan, hit Al-Qaeda hard and got out. We should have never went into Iraq.
I think Americans have been tired for some time.
10 years in Iraq, 11 years in Afghanistan, both are in turmoil.
What have we accomplished in 10+ years of war?
We should have gone into Afghanistan, hit Al-Qaeda hard and got out. We should have never went into Iraq.
We agree on something.
Getting the ones responsible for 9/11 and then come home.
Oh for a mulligan of the 2012 election.
That man had a groundswell that was drawing huge crowds, including 7,000 at UCLA and Berkley.... But hey, let's not announce him the actual winner of Iowa or allow precincts in states he carried 4 years earlier because of "inclement weather".
With Obama's approval ratings dropping Ron Paul had a real shot 1v1. He could've pulled from the center without a doubt. Meanwhile Romney was run to the front again, and pulled 4-5 total people not normally voting (R).... go figure.
It may not be popular to say this as emotions run high and calls ring out for more bombing in the Middle East, but there is another way to address the problem. There is an alternative to using more military intervention to address a problem that was caused by military intervention in the first place.
That solution is to reject the militarists and isolationists. It is to finally reject the policy of using regime change to further perceived US and western foreign policy goals, whether in Iraq, Libya, Syria, or elsewhere. It is to reject the foolish idea that we can ship hundreds of millions of dollars worth of weapons to moderates in the Middle East and expect none of them to fall into the hands of radicals.
Ever since interventionists turned America toward empire and foreign control and domination in the Spanish American War in 1898, there has been no nation-state that has invaded the United States. There is a simple reason for that: No nation-state in Europe, Africa, and Asia has the money, armaments, personnel, equipment, supplies, or even the interest in crossing the ocean and invading the United States. Moreover, at the risk of belaboring the obvious, the same holds true for Canada and Latin American countries.
While U.S. interventionism includes Latin America, America’s deadliest foreign wars have been waged “over there” — in countries thousands of miles away from American shores. Since none of them involved an invasion of the United States, none of them can be said to be have been waged in “self-defense.” They were all based on foreign interventionism.
Combining a national-security state with an interventionist foreign policy proved to be a disaster for the American people in terms of a never-ending series of foreign wars — wars that had nothing to do with defending the United States from an invading power.
The Korean War.The Vietnam War.The Grenada War.The Panama War.The Iraq War.The Afghanistan War.The Somalia War.And more...All with the consequence of placing American soldiers, who were made to believe that they were “defending” America, in a position of killing foreigners or being killed by them.