Good reason(s) for war
Moms View Message Board: The Fox Hole (War-Related Discussion): The Front Line (Personal Opinions on Hot Topics/Debating Allowed Here):
Good reason(s) for war
Everyone keeps talking about how we need a "good reason for war"..well, what ARE some good reasons? Who decides if the reasons are good enough? Have we ever really gone to war for a "good" reason?
I think defense of our country would be an excellent reason to wage war. I think defense of our allies would be a good reason. I think a preemptive war by this country negates what we have always stood for, but a raid to blow up weapons that could be used against us is reasonable.
WWII was a "good reason" war. To some extent, WWI was also, because our allies (England, France, etc.) were in great need. Although I don't think the Korean War was a "good reason" war, it at least was a U.N. activity on which the United Nations agreed. To go back in history (I am a history buff), the war against Napoleon was a "good reason" war.
We fought the War of 1812 against the British because they were stopping our ships and impressing (drafting) U.S. citizens who were crewing those ships, because they needed to crew their ships to fight Napoleon.
The War Between the States was a terrible war, fought for the "good reason" of keeping the United States united. (Freeing the slaves was an afterthought and didn't occur legally until well into the war, and the Emancipation Proclamation only freed slaves in Confederate states.) It could probably have been prevented had politicians paid more attention to finding diplomatic solutions instead of getting elected, but that is all history now.
The Revolutionary War - yes, a "good reason" war.
The Spanish-American War - not - and founded on the lie that the Spanish blew up the battleship Maine while it was in a harbor in Cuba.
As for the War in Viet Nam, well, we all have opinions. Mine is that it was not a good war, and was not fought for any good reason. Investigative writers using the Freedom of Information Act have uncovered that the Bay of Tonkin (or was it Gulf) resolution which enabled our doing that war, based on ships of the U. S. Navy being attacked by the North Vietnamese while in "international waters" was a lie.
I still don't understand why our leaders are so dead set on war against Iraq which, if it does have explosive, chemical and biological "weapons of mass destruction", has no means of delivering them in any quantity to any place outside of their neighboring territories. I don't think they are any more of a threat to us than any other nation in that arena. At the same time, we know that terrorists are harbored and supported in Iran, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, all supposedly our allies, and we are taking few if any steps to deal with that problem.
And we are taking a "diplomatic" approach with North Korea, which has some nuclear weapons already, probably has the capability of delivering them to our shores, and is in the process of building more nuclear weapons.
To me, it doesn't make sense.
As for North Korea, this is a recent problem with them, we have been dealing with Sadam for 12 yrs.
As for why against Iraq, I think the people deserve the same rescue from a mad man as the Jews did in Germany. I think people don't want this rescue attempt b/c of the threat of the weapons of mass destruction. Everyone has the right to have the freedom to live in their own country without fear of death, and I for one thank God that I live in a country that has always defended the rights of every person in any land to do that, that is one of the reason this country has maintained such power and we have enjoyed lifes of plenty, we are capable of reaching out to others. America in my opinion is defending their own by defending others, b/c we are a country made up of every Nationality, a country of the people.
As for the UN, I think it was the worst mistake we ever made as a country to join them. We have always stood strong, they would like nothing less than to weaken the United States. I have never liked the sound of a one world government, it will lead to a lot of things that will change, and not for good.
We have been dealing with North Korea and have had U.S. troops on the border between North and South Korea since the "end" of the Korean War - the cease-fire that was signed in late 1953 - 50 years ago. It never actually ended - we just have a truce of sorts. This is a problem that has been going on, with the involvement of U.S. troops, for about 55 to 60 years.
As for the U.N., it was our idea. It was never intended to be a government. It was intended to be a place where differences between nations could be worked out in some way other than war, where the stronger nations would work together to bring the smaller nations to negotiations and non-military means of solving their differences - and a way for nations to work cooperatively to solve problems which affect more than one nation, like disease and famine. It was a great idea, and it was ours. It just doesn't work very well for a lot of reasons, most of which I don't know much about, but it was still a great idea.
And, as a history buff, I point out that we did not get involved in WWII to rescue the Jews from the Holocaust. In point of fact, our government tried very hard to downplay knowledge about the concentration camps and genocide that was taking place in Germany and countries it occupied. It was a horrible surprise to most Americans when our troops started liberating the camps because what information had come to our government through Jewish intelligence was kept secret from us, and what little made it into the public was not believed. And, frankly, a large part of the U.S. was strongly anti-Semitic and really didn't care much about the fate of the Jews until the full horror was known. We went to war against Germany for other reasons - because of the need of our allies, England and France and our treaties; because German U-boats were attacking U.S. shipping, and, most important and the most immediate reason, Germany's ally, Japan, attacked Pearl Harbor, which made it possible for Roosevelt to get the U.S. into a war which Congress and many, many citizens (including, for example, Henry Ford) had been trying to keep the U.S. from getting involved in. Had it not been for Pearl Harbor, who knows what we would have done.
(I say much of America was anti-Semitic during and after WWII based on history, surveys done at the times, and on personal knowledge. I married a man of German background with a name that many took - and still take - as Jewish. Shortly after we married - in 1957, long after the knowledge of the Holocaust - I was turned down for a job I was fully qualified for because they had "filled their quota". When I pointed out that I was not Jewish, I was told that because my name sounded Jewish, it "would make trouble" if they hired me.)
I do realize we have had troops in South Korea for years, my father fought and was wounded in that war, I was referring to the recent activity that brings concerns about the possible building up of nuclear weapons again, which our government leaders still feel there will be the opportunity for talks with the newly elected leader of NK. They have been talking with Sadam for 12 years. I also I'm aware that the United States helped start the UN, I merely stated that my opinion is it was not a good idea, I base that on prophesy that is in scripture.
As for why previous wars began, I'm sure know one knows all the facts of why those decisions were made but the people who made them, I tend to try and see God's plan in it, and that was to rescue his chosen people. I happen to believe that God is behind all good things, some times it takes a rough route to get there, but his will be done.
War is not a pleasant thing, but some times it is necessary to fight evil.
Colin Powell stated that Saddam has made alliances with Osama and his terrorist cells. Saddam can supply the cells with the bio-agents....which can be spread like wild fire from the various cells.
|
Members
