And what exactly justified it? Especially since he took a "Europe first" stance while america was screaming for Japan. Remember that no one outside of germany knew of the concentration camps. And Germany's re-taking the Rhineland, and subsequent attacks were mostly in response to Europe crapping on Germany in post WWI, which would make thier attacks "justified" as well. What do you get when BOTH sides have "justified" reasons for going to war?
-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
American Soldier Death Count In Iraq Almost @ 4,000
Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
And what exactly justified it? Especially since he took a "Europe first" stance while america was screaming for Japan. Remember that no one outside of germany knew of the concentration camps. And Germany's re-taking the Rhineland, and subsequent attacks were mostly in response to Europe crapping on Germany in post WWI, which would make thier attacks "justified" as well. What do you get when BOTH sides have "justified" reasons for going to war?
Brigandier
Diamond Member
Bin Who?
sandorski
No Lifer
Untrue to begin with.
It is your "Logic" that seems to think any reason is good enough. I'm the one making the argument one War has worth and the other doesn't. You are the one trying to muddy things to make any kind of value judgment moot. I am using Reason and Logic, but you seem caught up in Gut Think.
In getting rid of Saddam, the Iraqi war clearly had "worth". He was clearly a homicidal dictator who deserved to get the boot. In that regard, a moral good was accomplished. But don't confuse my point - that alone wasn't a good reason for the US to go in there, and I'm not saying it was.
GTaudiophile
Lifer
Everyone knows that more people die on American highways every year than all the years we've been in Iraq.
So, your logic is that there's no such thing as bad policy being able to waste American lives (putting aside the other side's people), because it'd upset people to say it did.
So, there were no wasted lives in Viet Nam, because it'd be upsetting to those who lost people they cared about to say the were wasted.
You think it's better to not say they were wasted in hopes of preventing wasting more lives and raising opposition to the policy, and instead to say they were all justified, noble losses.
Do you have any idea how foolish and dangerous your bad logic is?
It's the same sort of bad logic that I like to look at with the Hatfield-McCoy family feud; anyone suggesting they just stop killing each other would be disrespecting the previous people killed, and deserve to have their teeth bashed in. If you think Uncle Joe was someone you care about, you have to honor his having been killed by insisting on killing more on the other side for revenge. Otherwise, you're not respecting him.
What a great, circular argument for unlimited war.
We have to kill more Iraqis to prove that the war was a good war, who have to fight us to prove that the people they lost to our invasion were wronged, just as we had to respond to 9/11, just as the Al Queda group had to respond to our aggression in the middle east by striking at our centers of business and military and government, just as we had to put Israel in the Middle East to give something to Jews after Hitler's genocide, just as Hitler had to 'get revenge' for his belief that Jews had played a role in Germany being treated terribly after WWI, just as the allies had to get revenge after WWI for the people Germany killed in WWI, just as WWI was triggered by the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand by someone who felt Ferdinand had done wrong, just as...
Why don't you want to kick in the teeth of the people who WASTE lives, rather than the people who point out that the lives are being wasted?
It's understandable - much as America in some ways wanted there to be some big conspiracy who killed JFK because it was hard to deal with the idea that the nation's leader could be killed by one small, sick person, it's natural to want there to be a noble cause because it's hard to see good people killed for a waste - but if you can't, then you are doomed to waste more lives. This was a lesson of Viet Nam as well - we couldn't get out for years, because doing so would say that the lives had been wasted.
It didn't matter that the war was wrong, what mattered was that the American soldiers killed couldn't be insulted by saying the war was wrong.
Some wanted to kick in the teeth of the people who first said Viet Nam was wrong - but those early critics were the best patriots, leading the way for the country to fix the mistake.
That led to John Kerry's famous question about asking a man to be the last killed for a mistake, an attempt to point out the flaw in that thinking - which is your thinking.
We have to always pay attention to whether war is justified, and direct the fury when it isn't at the bad leaders, not the other side in the war.
dennilfloss
Past Lifer 1957-2014 In Memoriam
Some WWI battles to keep things in perspective.
http://killeenroos.com/5/WW1Bat.htm
Some Vietnam casualties by year also.
http://www.rjsmith.com/kia_tbl.html
http://killeenroos.com/5/WW1Bat.htm
Some Vietnam casualties by year also.
http://www.rjsmith.com/kia_tbl.html
JSt0rm
Lifer
This thread is so odd. The "pro-war" come in here and talk about how 4000 american soldiers lives ins't a big deal when compared to other conflicts? lol. You people are insane. PM me for the phone number to a mother and father who lost one of their sons I'll let you call them and bring them this great news.
dahunan
Lifer
Please FIND the counts for soldiers who have been permanently disabled due to this war.. those who now survive degrees of burns that make them barely recognizable
How many soldiers in those wars you referenced died because there was no way whatsoever to transport them to a medical facility and because the tech did not exist to save them
Can you also show dollar amounts stolen from US citizens to fund this transgression against humanity?
The pro war crowd is in large part just deluded - they can't recognize why they are so in favor of the war, and they create phony reasons that are 'noble' to justify it.
That leads them to tortured logic, where if it were a liberal making the argument that 4,000 isn't that many for some reason they'd scream in outrage, but when they make the argument to not have to give up the war, that's different. They are dealing with the fantasy exaggerated threats, and are stuck in the fallacies.
There's a well-titled book by Chris Hedges, "War is a Force That Gives Us Meaning" which well describes the reasons many of these people get locked into wanting war.
But while you correctly point out the logical problem in their argument, they aren't being rational and they can't get what you're saying.
It's like trying to reason an alcoholic out of drinking. Ain't gonna happen.
nice dig but no. I highly doubt you missed the obvious.
He said we attacked germany because they declared war on us, I pointed out that declaring war on us dont mean jack shiite. Bin Laden did it and then attacked American soil 3 times and then a US warship, yet it wasnt until the 5th attack that we did anything about it (go after him in Afghanistan)
Brigandier
Diamond Member
Germany is t a country, Bin Laden is the head of a group of unorganized extremists.
Edit: And Bin Laden is not socially relevant any more, not defeated like Germany, just forgotten about.
Edit: And Bin Laden is not socially relevant any more, not defeated like Germany, just forgotten about.
AyashiKaibutsu
Diamond Member
We could go with the manical loon bit and then the Iraq war becomes justified. Unless one is willing to agrue that Sadam wasn't a manical loon.
Nice, the old 'soldiers would hate you for talking badly about the war' argument. Well, I know a lot of Marines that want to punch George Bush in the face for wasting their friends' lives. I guess we're even.
Oh, and you might want to read a history book. FDR didn't attack Germany, Germany declared war on the US.
EDIT: Oh, and the whole idea of comparing Osama Bin Laden to a modern industrialized nation that was in the middle of a (successful) aggressive war with our allies, and whose allies were attacking and seizing our and our allies' territory is... really dumb.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
