Veritas, I just c/p'd what was on the mapsofwar website. I don't get any credit or blame.
centerish, there were a couple of recent "blue" wars featured in the rolling graphic at mapsofwar, giving credit to then-Pres. Clinton.
All subject to (your) interpretation, I know...
0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Interesting graphics but like Rush, interpretation is the deciding factor. Lets take two wars: The pacific theatre during WWII and the Iraq war. Roosevelt had no choice, we were attacked. Roosevelt attacked the aggressive country, Japan. Bush attacked a sovereign nation who had no part in the 9-11 attack on the US. Because of our superiority in firepower, Bush killed hundreds of thousands of civilians as well as many US soldiers without cause. Like I said, subject to interpretations. The Iraq war was NOT a necessary evil. So, did you read the letter from the soldier?
1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Just for centerish, the anti-Republican
mapsofwar . com/ind/american-wars . html
"Which presidents and political parties were responsible for America's deadliest wars? To what extent can you blame a president or a political party for choosing to go to war? This map may hold some answers. It illustrates the history of American war from 1775 to 2006. War is a necessary evil. Politics, however, shouldn't be."
1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Syria has more problems than can be solved here and now. Best guess is the war continues until somebody wins.
I'm a firm believer in Global Warming now. All the evidence I need is the current heat wave here during the month of March. I've had my central air on for 3 weeks now. I hope it cools down.
So, are there any comments out there on the dying soldier's open letter to Bush and Cheney? He told it like it is. But, what the heck, a couple hundred thousand civilians killed in shock and awe, now that is justified? That is Republican. Republicans never met a war they did not like especially if their friends in the military support corporations could make tons of money.
6 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
When it comes to war and killing it seems silly that someone tries to make "game rules". So getting blownup to smithereens is okay.
4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
Just saw on TV the POTUS was in Syria, they must really hate us because they are letting him come back.
4 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
It would be immoral to use chemicals to kill people during a war. When you have a war, you can only use authorized weapons sanctioned by the Ministry Of War.
When you kill people, it must be ethical, legal, justified, and moral. Drones would be the weapon of choice in Obomba's arsenal used to kill people.
Chemical weapons are Verboten, so Obama will just use drones.
Kind of takes the heat off of Obama and makes Syria look like the bad guy.
Had Obama used chemical weapons to kill people, well then, it would have been moral, legal, ethical, and justified.
All Assad has to say is the use of chemical weapons is moral, legal, ethical, and justified, so we're going to use them.
Chemicals are used to makes bombs, dynamite, therefore, bombs are chemical weapons too.
Drones good, chemicals bad.
4 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
It's a civil war and we should stay out of it but when it's a Liberation War I'm for them.
5 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »
301 4th St SE , Minot, ND 58703 | 701-857-1900