Of course, the past is no prognostication of the future. If we have another bubble like 1893, will our glorious tech and finance bros bail out the US like J. P. Morgan did back then? Or will we recall how Pearl Harbor pulled the economy up, up, up (which happened not at all after the Tonkin Gulf nor 9/11) and launch another war?
@crowmanyclouds I guess you’ve read further about General Smith and Frederick Funston? Even worse than that psycho SEAL who Trump pardoned.
The Falklands war got Thatcher reelected. It was started by the Argentine Junta, but she didn’t have to respond with military force.
Didn’t go so well for the Junta, of course.
Heh. Thanks for a moment of levity in an otherwise (justifiably) bleak thread.
Nice to see you again, tomndebb!
Short of abandoning the English-speaking inhabitants of the islands to a regime that was busily “disappearing” people, what was the alternative? Politely asking the junta to please not? Sanctions? I’m sorry but soft power is often extremely limited in its effectiveness; sometimes being a “warmonger” is the only thing that other warmongers respond to.
Give them all British citizenship and evacuate them to the UK? Maybe demand the junta give them compensation? There were no really good options, but that’s often the case.
I don’t know that Thatcher really chose to fight in order to distract from domestic problems, though. From what I’ve read, she was sincerely outraged at the invasion.
I’m pretty sure both of those would have still required the use of military force.
That said; responding to an unprovoked attack with force is not being a “warmonger”. The attacker is the warmonger. There’s a difference between preferring peace and being self destructive.
I’m truly glad to hear you say that; there are some absolutists who would deny even that.
So, you’re saying that Iran would be justified in responding with force to the America’s unprovoked attack on them?
Pretend there are two nations with grievances, nations with large militaries. They are, through diplomacy, supposedly negotiating in good faith.
Suddenly one nation stops negotiating in good faith and engages in a sneak attack. The attack destroys military infrastructure and kills hundreds of people (perhaps many more).
That country and its people would become incredibly angry about it. The hateful racist rhetoric might take decades to overcome, yes?
December 7th, 1941 is my cite.
( This attack was a stupid move made by stupid ‘leaders’ employed inside a stupid government )
Agreed.
( and every time I see your name it reminds me John Ritter is dead… and that he would be ashamed of all of us if he was still alive. BTW- That’s a hijack.
And I had to explain it and draw it out because if I don’t some brain-dead idiot will say,
“I don’t get it! It can’t be because I’m just stupid; it must be because he’s on drugs or alcohol. Maybe even that evil, evil pot.”
This is the pit, so I’m going to jump right into that hijack. Who is John Ritter? Does he have anything to do with RitterSport chocolate bars?
Have you met John Ritter? I love your celebrity stories!
So if, for example, Israel intentionally starved Gaza and prevented aid from reach the people living there, what would be the reaction? Pieces of shit like you would cheer and the people in America who had a problem with it would be called radicals.
I’m curious…if you lived in a city that was regularly hit by rockets from a neighboring city how long would you put up with it? Really asking.
Since 2001, Palestinian militants have launched tens of thousands[1][2][3][4] of rocket and mortar attacks on Israel from the Gaza Strip as part of the continuing Israeli–Palestinian conflict. - SOURCE
Two things:
< points to all of US history >
If that country had been actively engaged for decades in murdering your citizens and stealing their land, what would do you? Really asking.
Let’s say you took someone’s land (or your dad did).
They then spend the next 20+ years shooting at you. Killing a person here and there. Running over and kidnapping some of your family.
How would you respond?
Why are you using the past tense for this hypothetical? Israel is still stealing Palestinian land and murdering innocent citizens. It’s not about self-defense.
You okay with that?
What past tense?
See the cites above. Well over 20+ years of rocket and mortar attacks. Before that were suicide bombings (busses and such).
Are you telling us you’d just shrug and say you have it coming? What do you tell your children?