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

My belief is that it compared closely to:

1) The Philippine-American War
If you haven't heard of this war, it is because they usually don't teach it, for a very good reason. If you are a knowlege nut like myself, read this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine-American_War

If you try to compare it to the American Revolution or World War II, please do. I could use a good laugh before I go to bed.

2007-06-20 17:34:54 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

12 answers

World War 2

The War on Terror (a misnomer really) is a multi-front war similiar to the one waged in the 40s. We are really in a war against Radical Islam, and I wish people would start calling it just that.

2007-06-20 17:52:30 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

Are you sure that it was called the Phillipine-American War or is that your definition. We (thats U.S.) were fighting the Mao-Mao islamic guerillas not filipinos in general. Being from Missouri I could also point out the occupation of Missouri by the federal government during the Civil War and the reconstruction afterwards. Don't laugh too much. The federals didn't know if those Missourians riding towards them were friends or foe. I had relatives on both sides including a Confederate Captain, a Union Captain, a Union Chaplin, and a Confederate Sniper.

2007-06-20 18:16:05 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I agree. I'm not sure if an Arthur MacArthur type or an older Smedley Butler type is what we need for it, though. You'll note that SOCOM forces are shedding their 9mm's in favor of 45's, just as they hated the 38 Colt and resurrected all the 45 SAA's they could then. You might also note that we told the Filipinos we'd give them independence in the 40's (the plan being put off schedule a bit by a skirmish with the Japanese) and eventually did so. Time will tell how close the parallel is.

2007-06-20 17:52:38 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I agree with you. The funny side note is that we invaded Iraq largely to control a certain vital resource called petroleum, and we took the Phillippines from the Spanish largely to control a different vital resource called Manila Hemp. That's right, Cannabis Hemp.

I also submit that in terms of sheer arrogance and duplicity, the current war in Iraq is akin to the way war was waged against the Native American nations during settlement and the westward expansion.

2007-06-20 18:11:29 · answer #4 · answered by oimwoomwio 7 · 1 0

there is not any secret as to why the final extremely war we are able to declare we certainly gained develop into WW2. and that i'm no longer talking approximately dropping the bomb in Japan, i'm certainly talking related to the war in Europe. the secret is that for the period of Europe, we went in, went from factor A to show B, complete what needed to be achieved, THEN rebuilt. Ever when you consider that then we've tried to decrease casualties on the front end, this has allowed us to win many battles, yet lose the final war. until we are keen to devote our troops to conflict, deliver them in to bypass from factor A to show B, THEN reorganize and rebuild, we ought to constantly deliver em domicile and under no circumstances devote them returned! it particularly is all

2016-10-18 05:25:21 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

This war is unique, that's what makes it so damned complex and frustrating and controversial.
History can't teach us much about fighting an ideology that uses such horrendous tactics to further its objectives without any regard for innocent victims - except in regards to the indiscriminate slaughter of them.

2007-06-20 17:58:59 · answer #6 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 0 0

exposing liberals

dead marxist

...ugh...I feel so sorry for you...world war 2?...cmon...there is no comparison...in fact I think our veterans would be offended by that...in no way did Saddam pose a threat to the american way of life...you have to separate the war on terror from the war in Iraq...they are not the same...

2007-06-20 17:55:07 · answer #7 · answered by MekTekPhil 4 · 1 1

yup, Philippine-American War is exactly what i would have said, because we'll be installing a loyalist government in Iraq to.

2007-06-20 17:44:00 · answer #8 · answered by avail_skillz 7 · 1 0

Jon, that is my answer too. I am glad you have enough knowledge of history to know an apt comparison.

IF the next President decides we need to swell our force to about double what it is now, I'll have to change my answer to Vietnam though. We aren't there yet.

2007-06-20 17:39:47 · answer #9 · answered by Nickoo 5 · 3 0

World War II. America is making a stand against fascism and has brought a tyrant to justice. Both wars are / were vital to the survival of our nation.

2007-06-20 17:40:07 · answer #10 · answered by x 4 · 2 4

fedest.com, questions and answers