drumdude wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2024 5:37 am
The intervention happened and the civilian casualties as I just posted were extremely low.
So, the 500,000 military casualties magically don't count? As long as civilian deaths are low, then the deaths of people in uniform can be any number, and nobody will notice their loss? Please answer those questions.
I am convinced it was worth it.
How about if you were one of the ones killed? Would you still be convinced it was worth it?
You’re convinced a fantasy hypothetical world where the US let Hitler run amok would have somehow saved lives, or money. Find one academic that believes that non-intervention was likely to produce a better outcome.
No, I'm convinced a hypothetical world where the US let Hitler run amok would have definitely saved AMERICAN lives and money. FOCUS: AMERICAN.
You see, I think it's an unwritten responsibility of the U.S. government to
preserve the lives of its citizens. I don't think it's the U.S. government's responsibility to balance a spreadsheet wherein X American citzens' lives are squandered so that X+1 foreign citizens' lives are saved. The preservation of the lives of foreign citizens is the responsibility of those citizens' governments, not ours.
Here's a hypothetical for you: If World War III were to break out, and the United States wasn't involved, would you want the government to draft you and send you over to fight in it anyway? If not, why not?
Kishkumen wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2024 10:11 am
Dr. Shades wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2024 2:16 am
Talk is cheap. Explain why getting involved in a world war is preferable to remaining out of it. Bonus points if you can do so without citing the propaganda of the military-industrial complex that makes billions from war.
What, you want me to fight one to prove the point?
No, I want you to EXPLAIN one to prove your point. . . just like I said, using actual English words that appeared on your computer monitor.
Here's a hypothetical for you: If World War III were to break out, and the United States wasn't involved, would you want the government to draft you and send you over to fight in it anyway? If not, why not?
At this point, I am worn out by the madness.
As am I.
Kishkumen wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2024 10:33 am
Dr. Shades wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2024 4:33 am
That's a good thing, 'cause instructors should share their political opinions about as often as they share their religious opinions.
People should all learn how to have polite, intelligent discussions without having a meltdown. Long before college would be the time to start. The problem is not sharing opinions. The problem is not knowing how to discuss things.
Agreed. But using one's position as a teacher to propagandize one's grade school, junior high, high school, or college students is dirty pool, 'cause those students can't really get up and leave. Teachers' politics is just like teachers' religion: It doesn't belong in school.
Hah! Um, yeah, but how people interpret history, the story told has political ramifications.
But not like our Democratic and Republican zealots want to propagandize it.
So, don't the snowflakes who gave in to the challenge share some of the blame?
What on earth are you talking about?
You said that some nutjob got 900 books banned from Florida schools. Couldn't anyone, anywhere, have said "no?" Was everyone in Florida at this nujob's mercy?
I disagree. It's a philosophy that values institutions and community action to such a great extent that it advocates removing government interference therein so people can more freely engage in them. What's so disagreeable about that?
Government is made of institutions and community actions. That’s what representative government is.
Great! You can run for government office just as easily under a Libertarian administration as any other, so what's your objection to Libertarianism?
Never once have I done anything tantamount to calling anyone a sissy for having "valid concerns" about our constitutional republic. Hell, I have such concerns myself! Let's face it, though: Musicians and songwriters quitting creating, being "terrified," being "petrified," having a panic attack and having to leave work, and rescheduling an appointment because you just couldn't function isn't symptomatic of having "valid concerns." They're dead giveaways of hyper-snowflake-ism. We, and the country, have enough resilience to weather the upcoming presidency, just like we did last time.
LOL! OK. I am glad that’s not what you mean . . . Oh, wait, you then go on to accuse musicians and songwriters of being sissies.
NO. FOCUS, Kishkumen, FOCUS: I only accused musicians and songwriters WHO QUIT CREATING SIMPLY BECAUSE DONALD Trump WAS ELECTED as being snowflakes. NEVER AT ANY TIME did I accuse musicians and songwriters IN GENERAL of being snowflakes.
Please read my ACTUAL WORDS next time.
Morley wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2024 1:01 pm
But what good does me answering your question do? We've already established that you and I are answering questions like this in completely different ways. I still don't know whether you think the North should have minded their own business and let the South secede.
Yes, the North should've let the South secede, under the reasoning enumerated within the first three sentences of the Declaration of Independence.
2. The reason America entered World War II was that Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, and then, a few hours later, invaded Philippines (which was then part of the US). Immediately after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, Germany declared war on the US. It was only after Japan had attacked and Germany had declared war that Congress decided that the US should enter WWII.
Dude, as someone who's avidly studied the second world war for nearly 40 years, I don't think you've ever met anyone who needs that lecture LESS than I do.
Should the US have just turned the other cheek and handed over her possessions while watching her people being slaughtered?
No, the U.S. should have not relocated its Pacific fleet from the West Coast to Pearl Harbor.
Here's a hypothetical for you: If World War III were to break out, and the United States wasn't involved, would you want the government to draft you and send you over to fight in it anyway? If not, why not?
Gadianton wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2024 3:04 pm
Where I become skeptical that "peace and love" is just a ploy by a right-winger advancing the Ku Klux Klan, is when the US should never have gotten involved in anything, but it's perfectly understandable why Putin attacked Ukraine.
No, it's not my position that it's "perfectly" understandable why Putin attacked Ukraine. My position is that a case can be made that he did so under the pretense of keeping NATO off his border. HIS MERE "PRETENSE," HOWEVER, DOES ***NOT*** JUSTIFY INVADING.
I don't see anything from Shades otherwise that can be linked to Alex Jones and Tucker, so I'd ask this another way. If we were to rank wars on a scale of 1-10 with 1 being "that war was absolutely wrong and never should have been fought," 5 is "perhaps it was better not to fight the war, but understandable that it was fought", and 10 being "that war most definitely should have been fought"; list 3 wars in world history that rank at a 5 or higher along with the ranking, and the reason for the ranking.
I'd say it's always or nearly always 10 for the defenders and 1 for the attackers. I'd have to look at potential exceptions on a case-by-case basis.
Morley wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2024 2:06 pm
Dr. Shades wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2024 5:18 am
So the 500,000 American lives lost, and the trillions of dollars of increase of the national debt, were worth it?
Absolutely.
What if YOU were one of the lives lost? Would it still be worth it to you?
canpakes wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2024 6:27 pm
Dr. Shades wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2024 2:16 am
Talk is cheap. Explain why getting involved in a world war is preferable to remaining out of it. Bonus points if you can do so without citing the propaganda of the military-industrial complex that makes billions from war.
Why do you Hate Capitalism, Shades?
Good point; I should repent of ever doubting the jingoistic--but self-serving--propaganda churned out by the bankers and industrialists who make billions of dollars from war.
Moksha wrote: ↑Sat Dec 14, 2024 1:14 am
Once those programs to aid old people are ended, will the Church step up and offer to house the senior citizens in some abandoned warehouses in the Salt Lake Area (with mandatory baptisms and church services, of course)?
Of course it will.
Some Schmo wrote: ↑Sat Dec 14, 2024 8:40 am
It's quite clear that if you are a complete ignoramus, it will seem like the people who are rightly concerned by the outcome of the election will seem like snowflakes, . . .
Dude, I've already explained this to you once and to Kishkumen twice:
There's a difference between "rightly concerned by the outcome of the election" and musicians & songwriters quitting creating, being "terrified," being "petrified," having a panic attack and having to leave work, and rescheduling an appointment because you just couldn't function. I too am rightly concerned by the outcome of the election, but I don't suffer from the hyper-snowflake-ism described in the opening post.
Now, will those words register with you this time, or will I have to explain it to you a third time? Please let me know.
. . . because they are in a panic about the shitstorm coming, and you are keenly unaware of the shitstorm coming.
Hold the phone. . . I thought Trump lies about everything. Now you're telling me he's telling the complete, 100% gospel truth about what he's going to do once he's in office?
Which is it? Does he always lie, or does he always tell the truth when it suits him least?
America is at the mercy of its idiots. I think there might be too much lead in the water. Americans are damned retarded, for the most part.
I completely, totally, and wholeheartedly agree.
Chap wrote: ↑Sat Dec 14, 2024 9:38 am
The US did not enter WWII because it was a kind elder brother who could have perfectly well stayed out of the whole business, but altruistically decided to help the poor little Europeans and Chinese. It entered the war because the Axis powers forced it to, by ruthlessly and very effectively attacking it.
And if the U.S. had kept its fleet on the West Coast, as any sane leader would've done, the Axis powers wouldn't have forced it to, ruthlessly and very effectively or otherwise.