Hist. proved: foreigners threatened us - democ. run / republ. fight?

Answer 1

This question is far deeper than it looks. Yes, Roosevelt was in power and Truman won the war; both were Old School Democrats back when the Dems were far more socially conservative and representative of a country emerging from an agricultural majority.

Perhaps the better way to address this is how political affiliation addresses how current Presidents manage conflict. The wars during the early part of the twentieth century were "set piece". This means they were large scale land based actions involving uniformed combatants on both sides.

Viet Nam, first under Kennedy then under LBJ coined the term Low Intensity Conflict although those who fought in the war never accepted that. It was a combination and primer on guerilla warfare backed by ideological warfare based upon defying a corrupt administration (the South Viet Nam political machine installed by Kennedy and LBJ was SO corrupt it went through a coup a year). Nixon, having the common sense he did, observed that the war was, while winnable at the battle level, was lost on the ideological level. He negotiated a peaceful withdrawal that empowered the SVN government to defend itself. It collapsed into its own corrupt hubris.

Carter pooched the Iran hostage situation because he was a total dove and woefully misinterpreted the intent and will of the Iranians. He was the first President who was profoundly impacted by the PEacniks and remains to this day an embarrassment.

Clinton couldn't manage a DoD because he had no sense of military leadership. I went through Somalia as an enlisted soldier and my wife was over there as an Officer. No one could move, crap or pick thier nose without Les Aspin authorizing it or making sure it wasn't an overt move of strength. That's the reason we were chewed up over there. We couldn't fight back on a level necessary to defeat the "technicals". Aspin and Clinton both admit their failures in Aspin's book.

Bush's 1 and 2 fought wars the old fashioned way. They punched the enemy in the nose, blurred his vision and kicked his butt. Iraq is an emerging democracy in an Arab world. This has never been accomplished in the 1300 plus years of Islam. The rulers of Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia have so much to lose that the extremists within the religion consider it absolutely necessary to fight back in Iraq. Thus the reason you see the use of Iranian made weapons, Syrian fighters trained under Hezbollah and money from the Wahhabi's in Saudi. Bush knows this but our press is so enamored with hugs not guns that they will not report the truth.

In the end, Republicans fight better, Democrats used to manage better but the swing to the left leaves them unaware of how to fight a war.

Answer 2

No, historically the Democrats have been the hawks, and the Republicans the isolationists.

They flip-flopped late in the Cold War.

Carter was a "peacemaker" (Camp David Accords), and an isolationist (rejection of request for political asylum by deposed Shah of Iran), and Reagan a hawk (New Brinkmanship, fall of Soviet Union) ... that's really the first historical example.

Of course there was Lincoln, but we weren't threatened by foreigners, we were "threatened" by our own, so that doesn't count.

So, no, you're wrong. Very, very wrong.

Answer 3

Franklin Delano Roosevelt, President when WW 2 broke out: Democrat

Woodrow Wilson, President when WW 1 broke out: Democrat

Jack Kennedy: Sent first advisors to Vietnam: Democrat

Harry Truman: President during Korean conflict: Democrat

Do I REALLY need to go on?

Answer 4

Actually until the middle Vietnam, Democrats often supported wars.

Answer 5

History proved Cheney falsified CIA intell and Rumsfeld falsified Pentagon intell to start a war. If repubs, as you put it, want to fight for a pack of lies they are welcomed to do so. Just don't drag me in the garbage heap with you.

Answer 6

So why is it then that the only wars we have ever lost have been ones in which a republican has been in office? While democrats have won thier wars and expanded the country in the process. Republicans just have better spin doctors.

Answer 7

hmm... well.. .didn't Nixon... a Republican run out of vietnam after LBJ and Kennedy wanted to stay?

and Truman and Rosevelt didn't run in WWII?

maybe you could say Korea?

I don't think history proves it...

Answer 8

I think you hit the nail on the head. To answer your question: yes.

Answer 9

http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/israel/calendar.html