English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

19 answers

I guess it all depends on your perspective. Get involved and help. Or don't get involved, don't help.

2007-01-16 23:44:02 · answer #1 · answered by what? 3 · 3 1

The government line would be that we've been asked to help. In Vietnam the south was being threatened by the Communist north, in Iraq, it was to free the people from Saddam , in Afghanistan, the government wanted the Taliban neutralized and asked for U.S. help. In places like Nicaragua , Venezuela, Panama, it was to protect U.S. interests or to go after leaders that don't agree with U.S. solutions to their problems. Because North America has really not been invaded over the years, America has a false sense of security. For someone to invade they need to cross either the Atlantic or Pacific oceans and historically no one had the ability to supply their forces. As such America has thought of themselves as invincible and that they know better what the solutions are to problems everywhere else in the world. Right or wrong, the U.S. always claims the higher moral ground for all of their foreign policy. Pretty easy to do when you have the biggest guns. But it is also why so many have begun to hate the U.S. In the 50's and 60's many countries feared a Soviet invasion, now they fear a U.S. one. Any time the U.S. suffers a minor recession of any kind, one way to help the economy is through military expenditures, so rationale(s) can be easily found. That's my take on it anyway.

2007-01-16 23:53:58 · answer #2 · answered by Bob D 6 · 1 1

We were invited, asked to come to Vietnam. The same thing with Korea.

As for Iraq, I am of mixed feelings about it. While there is nothing demonstrating that terrorist attacks were directed from within Iraq, you have to admit that there has not been another serious attempt to attack the US since we went to Iraq. For me personally, results are what count. And as I have said before, world opinion and collateral damage matter not one bit to me. Protecting the citizens of the US from attack is the only issue. Is there some problem with that?

2007-01-16 23:44:54 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Because when we DIDN'T interfere in the affairs of other countries so much a guy named Adolf Hitler won the election in Germany, and we didn't worry about it. Then he started picking on the Jews and we didn't worry about it. Then he built up his army and broke the Treaty that ended WW1, and we didn't worry about it, then he made friends with Italy and they both backed a Facist guy named Franco in the Spanish Civil War, and Franco won, and we didn't worry.

Then they made friends with the Japanese, and the Japanese invaded China and did horrible things to the Chinese Civilians, and we didn't worry because it was a long way away. Then Italy invaded Ethiopia and we still didn't care.

Then Hitler took over Austria, but the Austrians were pretty much like Germans anyway, so nobody did anything, and by now the Jews were getting shipped off into camps and we didn't care. Then Hitler wanted Czechoslovakia, but nobody was strong enough to stop him taking what he wanted, so the British and French gave it to him, but started building airplanes as fast as they could. We didn't care though.

Then Hitler signed a secret treaty with Russia saying that they would be friends and never attack each other.

Two days later Hitler attacked Poland, then England and France declared war on Hitler, and Russia attacked Poland. Poland fell, and nobody was really in a postion to do anything about it.

Then Russia took over Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia, but nobody did anything. Then they attacked Finland but the Finns held them off.

Then Hitler attacked Norway, and the Brits tried but couldn't stop him. He was to strong by now.

Then Hitler and Italy attacked France. Fully 1/3 of the tanks that Hitler used going into France were ones that had been part of the Czechoslovakian Army before he was given Czechoslovakia. Holland, Belgum and France all fell within a couple of days.

Britian almost fell too. Only luck, radar, the channel, and the RAF saved her.

Then Italy attacked Greece, and Hitler had to go help them out, and he wound up conquering Greece and Yugoslavia too.

Then Hitler attacked Russia, destroyed the Russian Army, and made it to the gates of Moscow before winter set in; meanwhile his troops in North Africa went into Egypt to go after the Suez Canal.

Then the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, and they took our bases in the Philipines, and Indonesia, and Burma and more of China.

And it took millions of deaths, years of war, untold blood and treasure, and two atomic bombs to end the war.

And it would have been a whole lot easier on everyone concerned if we had just interfered sooner when he was smaller and weaker and easier to deal with.


You don't let a cancer grow to the size of a baseball before you go to the doctor. The same thing is true in politics.

2007-01-17 00:34:57 · answer #4 · answered by Larry R 6 · 2 0

Vietnam and Iraq, OK. Depends on your perspective.

Let's not forget all the countries with which we are interfering on a daily basis with our humanitarian and foreign aid. The food, medicine, volunteers, bridge and road building, clean water & purification plants.

Is their a reason you failed to mention any of these countries? Perhaps your own for instance.

2007-01-16 23:46:26 · answer #5 · answered by iraq51 7 · 2 0

As far as Iraq, some how some way Israel is in there calling the shots. They need to give all the land yes including over half of Jersulim back to the rightful people and countries and this needs to be done immediately, this is the only way for peace to have a chance. If you are from israel, and have to work in a different country then get a green card and the correct paper work to cross the border. If Israel is an allie of the US why is the country not helping with the war on terror on the fronts, instead they cause more trouble in the region.

2007-01-17 00:12:41 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 4

Remember last 2-3 centuries when England ruled the world.
It's the start of same in modern style and there is no one to object accept you and few news-papers. You have shown great courage doing so. I admire your courage..........

2007-01-17 02:10:02 · answer #7 · answered by ashutosh ddn 1 · 0 0

Because they earn money doing wars. The weapons industries are making tonnes of money and this moves the economy.

2007-01-17 01:39:48 · answer #8 · answered by Coquine 2 · 0 0

and now Somalia. It just wants every country to be democratic, just like America. Vietnam was another thing , but now if any weak, small country has oil, Attack!

2007-01-17 00:39:07 · answer #9 · answered by nashpaty 3 · 0 2

WAR Proifts.

The USA hates peace...there is no money in peace.

Why did the WAR Department change it's name in 1946 to the Defense Dept? So it would not be shut down and could keep massive spending going.

General Dynamics, KBR, Halliburton, Boeing, Northrup....these are all the winners of war. They want war and will keep us at war forever.

I suggest you read the novel 1984 by George Orwell

2007-01-17 00:07:40 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 4

Because the rich people who actually buy the government officials (like any other country actually), use the military to take, or try to take, what they want that doesn't belong to them.

In short, you got it, they want it and if you won't give it they will try to take it.

2007-01-16 23:40:13 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers