• 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.

US strike kills Iranian Quds Force commander

Page 38 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
pmv said:
I agree only insofar as party labels are not synonymous with ideologies and social and economic interests. The former is an epiphenomenon (especially in the US where you just have these two ill-defined brand names that have dramatically switched positions on major issues at least once). The latter can become manifest in different ways at different times.

Right now though the most ardent supporters of high-risk and unnecessary war are clustered around the Republican party.
Click to expand...

In terms of casualties, Democrats take the cake by a mile. So, again, quit trying to measure e-peen of political parties and condemning just Republicans.


Since the Civil War about 98% of war deaths are from wars started while the President was a Democrat. Here is a list:

World War II 405K Roosevelt Democrat

World War I 116K Wilson Democrat

Vietnam 58K Kennedy or Johnson Democrat

Korea 36K Truman Democrat

Iraq 4K Bush Republican

Philippines 4K McKinley Republican

Spanish-American 2K McKinley Republican

Afghanistan 2K Bush Republican

So you have 625K deaths in wars started under Democrats and 12K deaths in wars started under Republicans.

Source: United States military casualties of war - Wikipedia
Click to expand...


 
SMOGZINN said:
It looks like Iran intentionally targeted expensive equipment. They probably did a few billion dollars worth of damage to US aircraft. Maybe they are thinking to make it very expensive to remain in an attempt to hurt the US economy?
Click to expand...

Speculation on Twitter is that they were targeting the Reaper drones and their maintenance/support infrastructure.
 
If not a single American was killed, then it was intentional on the part of the Iranians, IMO. Tehran is actually showing restraint, while trying to keep their pride but not igniting further conflict.
 
It would be a mistake for conservatives to interpret Iran's missle attacks like Saddams wild shooting of inaccurate, shitty scuds.

I'm sure Trump will try to sell it as this...
 
s0me0nesmind1 said:
In terms of casualties, Democrats take the cake by a mile. So, again, quit trying to measure e-peen of political parties and condemning just Republicans.





Click to expand...

Again, stop pretending that party labels are some timeless objective entity. A list like that is meaningless, as not every war is the same and there's nothing constant and objective about party labels. How about looking at things as they are, now?

Also, is it your position that the US should have stayed out of WW2?

Fact is I've made similar points myself when arguing with liberals - Vietnam in particular owed much to liberal fear of being called soft on communism. Going right back to JS Mill and his support for the British control of India, in the name of spreading liberal values, there's always been an empire-building strand to liberalism, much of the British Empire was justified by what would now be called liberal interventionism. But the real world is complicated and liberals are sometimes right.
 
Last edited:
Jeez, Trump actually said a couple of semi-sane things like cooperating with Iran on ISIS. Did the joint chiefs spike his coke?
 
s0me0nesmind1 said:
In terms of casualties, Democrats take the cake by a mile. So, again, quit trying to measure e-peen of political parties and condemning just Republicans.
Click to expand...

World War II 405K Roosevelt Democrat

World War I 116K Wilson Democrat

Vietnam 58K Kennedy or Johnson Democrat

Korea 36K Truman Democrat

Iraq 4K Bush Republican

Philippines 4K McKinley Republican

Spanish-American 2K McKinley Republican

Afghanistan 2K Bush Republican
Click to expand...

President Truman left office in 1953.

So what you are saying is that in the last 67 years it is almost exclusively Republicans getting our youth killed in wars?
 
s0me0nesmind1 said:
In terms of casualties, Democrats take the cake by a mile. So, again, quit trying to measure e-peen of political parties and condemning just Republicans.





Click to expand...
I believe you just claimed, meh Obama lies Trump lies.

Anyone who understands nuance will see the instant hilarity in that
 
SMOGZINN said:
President Truman left office in 1953.

So what you are saying is that in the last 67 years old it is almost exclusively Republicans getting our youth killed in wars?
Click to expand...
It would seem that Vietnam, initiated by a Democrat, would belong in those post-Truman wars and dwarfs them.
 
Again though I don’t see why it matters because we should pay attention to what exists TODAY, and the primary pushers of aggressive foreign wars are Republicans. There is a reason Republicans keep hiring John Bolton and Democrats dont.
 
Did exactly what you guys wanted. Also Trump wants to enter into a new nuclear arms agreement. Smart move by Trump. We'll see how you guys spin how poorly he handled things
 
OILFIELDTRASH said:
Did exactly what you guys wanted. Also Trump wants to enter into a new nuclear arms agreement. Smart move by Trump. We'll see how you guys spin how poorly he handled things
Click to expand...
Lol, good luck with that. Trump has already proven to be an untrustworthy negotiator. The US would have to likely make a lot of concessions to bring people back to the table after ripping up the last agreement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top