We’re still technically at war with N. Korea, aren’t we, since we never signed a treaty after the war, just an armistice? Bad thing, since Bush wouldn’t need congressional approval to attack.
Originally posted by Sorcerer
The entire concept of the war against Iraq was the notion of preemptivity - we were hitting them before they could hit us. I would completly agree with what you guys are saying, if Kim Jong Il hadn’t already stated that he would attack us.
But Iraq was no threat to us. Notice how the attack was “Iraqi Freedom” and about freeing the Iraqis from Saddam’s rule since there were no WMDs. Bush forced the war every way possible. It was a preemptive strike, it was something Bush did because he wanted to remove Saddam. Iraq was not a threat, just look at how easily and fast we beat the country. Is that really a threat? Even Afgahnistan took longer and that campaign went pretty well.
Originally posted by demigod
We’re still technically at war with N. Korea, aren’t we, since we never signed a treaty after the war, just an armistice? Bad thing, since Bush wouldn’t need congressional approval to attack.
We’re ready for war, we have tons of troops there still and have incredible security measures on both sides. In fact, we have troops watch posts just outside the North Korean side ready to fight in case they move.
Originally posted by Infonick
We’re ready for war, we have tons of troops there still and have incredible security measures on both sides. In fact, we have troops watch posts just outside the North Korean side ready to fight in case they move.
You didn’t really address either sentence. The bad thing idea is that Bush could decide to go to war whenever, not that we’re unprepared.
Originally posted by demigod
You didn’t really address either sentence. The bad thing idea is that Bush could decide to go to war whenever, not that we’re unprepared.
What I’m trying to say is that we aren’t really at war, but are ready for it. While I guess you could say the war isn’t over since never had an official treaty. Also, there have been minor skirmishes, but it isn’t really a war, just an explosive situation.
Originally posted by demigod
We’re still technically at war with N. Korea, aren’t we, since we never signed a treaty after the war, just an armistice? Bad thing, since Bush wouldn’t need congressional approval to attack.
Not that he really needs congressional approval to attack, anyway. There’s been ways around that at least since the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, if not before.
“Emergency defensive powers” and all that stuff. Combined with our cute little logic leap to the point where getting in the boats and planes, traversing the oceans, and proceeding to bomb and invade a country is an act of DEFENSE, not offense, now, in modern American English.
Bush is nothing more than a warmongerer
Originally posted by vyse the legend
Bush is nothing more than a warmongerer
…who is the Commander in Chief of the United States Army.
Originally posted by demigod
…who is the Commander in Chief of the United States Army.
And the other braches. The Army is a branch of the military, not THE military.
Army
Navy
Air Force
Marines
AND the Coast Guard.
Five Branches. Which, incidentally, is why The Pentagon is a, well, Pentagon. 5 Sides (5 Wings). 5 Branches of the Military.
Result- Be afraid, be very afraid