Regarding Eactivist's post:
No one has launched a war because they wanted to. To state such nonsense is
to assume that the one launching the war has dictatorial power. To assume
that the President of the US, Prime Minister of Briton, Prime Minister of
Australia have such powers. To assert that they have dictatorial power would
betray great ignorance.
We came to the defense of an ally, Kuwait - one of the few ME states that
were reasonably friendly with the western world. In the prosecution of the
war we prevailed, but listening to coalition forces, we backed off and left
Saddam with his country. In the negotiation to end the hostilities, Saddam
accepted 14 or so articles as a condition to end hostilities and to keep his
position as leader of Iraq. He then proceeded to violate every single one of
those articles required to end the war maintain his (and his government's
and his party's) position. Many times over. He did this continually over a
period of 12 years! These were acts of war and the war resumed because of
these violations. While there were two campaigns, it's an error to think
that there were two Gulf wars.
From: "Kevin Waterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Pearl Harbour was the result of failed US foreign policy.
Really!
The United States and the United Kingdom reacted to Japanese military
actions
Those "actions" as you called them were Imperialism and brutality on a grand
scale.
in China
And Indonesia, and the Philippines, and Burma and pretty much everything in
between.
by imposing a scrap metal boycott followed by an oil boycott, a freeze
of assets and the closing of the Panama Canal to Japanese shipping.
It was our scrap metal, our oil and our Panama Canal. A country can do what
it wishes with it's own assets. Japanese assets in this country were frozen
after the war started.
The only
choice for Japan was to seek oil in South East Asia
Only choice? Really? How about canceling their imperialist actions in China!
Are you saying this was not an option? As to seeking oil in SEA, exactly how
did this "seek[ing of] oil" proceed? Did they approach Indonesia saying, "We
would like to enter into a mutually beneficial trading agreement for oil?"
and with the the Americans
firmly entrenched in Pearl Harbour
That's Pearl Harbor. We don't change the spelling of your
territories/provinces etc. to suit how we think it should be spelled. Pearl
Harbor was a US territory and now a state by their choice. We are firmly
entrenched in Puerto Rico too, did you know that. It's a US Territory. What
the hell did you intend to connote by using the words "firmly entrenched?"
they had to neutralize the American fleet
or cave into their demands to get out of China.
Yes. What, exactly gave Japan the right to China?
It was anything but an un-provoked or "outright" attack, it was a response
to
American policy.
Damned right. It was a response to someone saying, "We don't like your
takeover and devastation of China, and we are no longer going to aid you in
doing it." Their response was one THEY CHOSE from among several.
Regards,
Bob...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By all means, marry. If you get a good wife, you'll become happy;
if you get a bad one, you'll become a philosopher.
- Socrates
From: "Kevin Waterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
This one time, at band camp, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Launching a war simply because you want to (maybe just for political
reasons)
I think all wars are fought for political reasons.
and convincing others it is a good thing, is certainly different from
responding to an outright attack (Pearl Harbor). Or even rushing to the
defense of
one's allies.
But I shouldn't have said that much. And I'll stop here.
Toooo late :)
Pearl Harbour was the result of failed US foreign policy.
The United States and the United Kingdom reacted to Japanese military
actions
in China by imposing a scrap metal boycott followed by an oil boycott, a
freeze
of assets and the closing of the Panama Canal to Japanese shipping. The
only
choice for Japan was to seek oil in South East Asia and with the the
Americans
firmly entrenched in Pearl Harbour they had to neutralize the American
fleet
or cave into their demands to get out of China.
It was anything but an un-provoked or "outright" attack, it was a response
to
American policy.
