…that doesn’t, and won’t, work. But hey, the only thing better than social isolationism is technological isolationism. :rolleyes:
i am the first to admit that the OP revealed a disturbing lack of knowledge about world affairs.
but if you think we’re going to go the next four years without foreign intervention, you are really misled.
it has nothing to do with who is president. it’s a fundamental part of the system. was Clinton a “hawk” before he came to office?
a “hawk” is somebody who is eager to go to war and actively pushes it; he supports the war with his hand over his heart.
a “dove” is somebody who might express doubts or question how necessary the war is, but supports the war anyways.
in the end, they are the same exact person.
I figure Dubya needs some Commie-fighting credentials to satisfy the Republican right wing.
Unfortunately we’re running low on Commies these days. Even Dubya isn’t dumb enough to get into a shooting war with China. We’ve already done the Viet Nam thing, and that didn’t work out. I guess that leaves only North Korea or li’l ol’ Cuba.
It’s tough to find Commernists to fight these days.
Except for oldscratch.
I think that GW will stay out of Western Europe because the country names are too hard to pronounce and spell. He will stick to easy to pronounce countries. Iraq. Cuba. Canada. China. OK, I was kidding about Canada. But if I had to pick someone who could get us into a war with Canada, my money would be on Dubya.
You know all these enviromentalists talk about how land fills are bad? Well they should be our new weapon. We cover a country in trash till they give up!!!
Is this the liberal capital of the web;). WTF?
Ok I say middle east, something to do with the israelis no doubt. I don’t think he will start too many wars, he doesn’t have that type of personality (IMO), but I don’t see how he can stay out of the middle east. Even young Albert would be sending troops there some time in the next 4 years, its inevitable, who ever got the job was gonna have that responsibility (or should I say perceived responsibity).
why doesn’t any one give GW a break? I know he aint the brightest guy in the world, but give it a rest already. Why don’t you “rogue” democrats organize a coup if your so unhappy;).
btw for clarification, I’m an independent not a repub so don’t bother flaming me with repub stuff, try to keep the flames of an independent nature:D.
Libertarin/repub/dem (thats me, a little of all three)
thats just to help you focus your flames a little.
"Now, now. Your title was regarding “wars,” not “interventions.”
Remember, Democrats get us into wars, Republicans just lose them."
Someone said this.
I don’t even care who it was. I just want to say that it rivals the thread bearers idiocy.
Clinton got our Military into so many “peace corps” operations in the last 8 years and guess what?
None of them made any difference. Go to Kosovo and tell me that things are different. Go to Rhwanda and tell me that we changed things there. Tell me something about Israel that is better off than 8 years ago. How are we doing with China and North Korea as compared to 8 years ago?
Tell me.
See I think that the best thing that came out of our little war with Iraq was that we kept Israel out of it. Believe me, Israel was itching.
Do you really think that Mr. Clinton would have done that?
Lets talk about that.
BTW, the only reason that we didn’t finish off Iraq was because of the peace loving liberals who were against it.
mx,
see I knew you would love this place;)
Apparently the next war will be here!
Rd,
What did you do, go get your friends?
Trying to change the demographics around here?
First time I’ve heard Saudi Arabia referred to as a nation of “peace loving liberals”. Ya learn something new every day.
Putting away the obvious bias of the OP, every President since FDR (with the possible exception of Ford, although there were a few incidents in his term), has started some major shooting/someone started shooting at us during his term. (Some may dispute Carter, but I think he belongs here. Desert One wasn’t the largest operation in the world, but it was an invasion of a sovereign nation.) So, the odds are strong that Bush will also get us involved in something/have involvement thrust upon him.
So, where will it be?
Columbia is the logical choice, but I don’t see it happening. “Vietnam syndrome” is mostly dead, but I think we will have a visceral reaction against fighting guerillas in a jungle. I think Kosovo will have more problems, but not enough to start a major new American shooting action. Cuba is a possibility, but only if Castro dies.
I think an intriguing possibility is — Indonesia. I would not be suprised if Indonesia breaks up along ethnic and sectarian lines in the next four years. A strong possibility would exist then of sectarian genocide against (mostly Chinese) Christians. Indonesia would give the right combination of factors for an intervention:
- Genocide;
- Strategic importance (vital sea lanes, oil and other mineral resources, massive population); and
- Identification of Americans with the victims, if they are the Christians.
I think intervention would only happen if the pogroms occurred on some of the outer islands - under no circumstances do I see us intervening on Java. If it’s one of the outer islands, the jungle/Vietnam factor would be lessened - our sea power and the limited amount of terrain would help Bush overcome qualms.
I’m not saying I favor this, but I think the possibility warrants scrutiny.
Sua
I wouldn’t exactly call the Saudis and Kuwaitis “peace loving liberals.” :rolleyes:
Like I’ve said, now, several times, it was the Arab members of the Coalition who chose not to take over Iraq.
I hate to say something nice about Bush, but he called it off after the end was accomplished, freeing Kuwait.
Kosovo - Well apart from the whole “goverment aided Serbs committing mass killings of Kosovars”, and that tiny little thing about “Kosovars being forced in to exile”, well not a lot is different, no.
Rhwanda - Well apart from the whole “mobs of people with guns killing innocent Rhwandans on a mass scale” well, not a lot has really changed there either.
Israel - Clinton sent no troops to Israel, Clinton rallied for peace there. Was this wrong of him?
China - Again, no troops to speak of.
North Korea - See “China”.
We’re certainly lucky that people like you weren’t leading countries like England, the USA or the Commonwealth countries during World War II, or we’d all speaking German and Japanese.
That’s called a joke, son.
Those of us who have finished high school (or paid attention while we were there) remember that one of the great cries of the Republican Party throughout the second half of the 20th century was that it was “always” Democrats who got us into wars. Ergo, any military activity initiated by a Republican must have been merely an intervention, not a war.
As to your one attempt at a substantive statement:
We have provided no military interventions in Israel, China, or Korea during the Clinton (or Reagan-Bush) administrations, so that hardly seems to be on topic, here. The ancient hatreds in Kosovo and Rwanda still seethe; the wholesale slaughter of people has tapered off.
I’d suggest you go fuss somewhere that knowledge is not as appreciated as passion.
trying to return this thread to intelligent discussion (Israel, Korea, China?! what have i been missing?), i really liked the idea SuaSponte suggested: Indonesia. enormous natural resources, a junta that needs re-propping, and a history of American involvement.
and best of all, Muslims and brown people, who Americans seem to really enjoy bombing.
but i thought we’ve come up with a neat solution for “Vietnam Syndrome:” keep our troops from getting killed, and the American public doesn’t have a problem (we don’t really care who gets killed on their side). pick on a weak opponent (that you’ve spent considerable effort pumping up into a giant menace), bomb them into submission, maybe have some ground troops to mop up. only time i can remember when Vietnam Syndrome has raised its head in recent years is when those pilots got killed and dragged through the streets in Somalia. other than that, we’ve been ready and willing participants.
and we defintely know what has changed in Kosovo: the depleted uranium that we left behind.
Friedo"Like I’ve said, now, several times, it was the Arab members of the Coalition who chose not to take over Iraq."
I didn’t suggest taking them over. I said “finish them off” didn’t I? Anyway, we were in control in this department. It would have been quite easy to remove Saddam.
Tomndebb"As to your one attempt at a substantive statement:
We have provided no military interventions in Israel, China, or Korea during the Clinton (or Reagan-Bush) administrations, so that hardly seems to be on topic, here"
First, I doubt that I am your son.
Second, is “intervention” the only thing that you are keeping track of? Is it just too much information for you so you deem the little things unimportant?
Don’t even try to make a point that “nothing” is going on there. I guess that I am looking more at what our government is bringing on us in the future. But its just as important as any “intervention”.
China and Korea are not going to be funny in the future. On top of that our Defense is questionable. Security is a Joke as well. This is all fact.---------
Israel is like the punk kid that acts up whenever his buddies are in the neighborhood. I’m not claiming to know anything about the Israel situation but this is what it has always been. We should get out of that and let what happens happen. Many believe that we were wrong to “give” them that land in the first place.
We didn’t give them Germany. We didn’t give Japan to the Chinese.
so why are you talking about it?
Religion of 90%+ of all Albanian Kosovars = Sunni Muslim
Religion of 90%+ of all Serbian Yugoslavs = Serbian Orthodox Christian
How’s that again?
I guess I just wanna register as someone who stands with waterj2 in knowing how to spell “Colombia.”
As numerous posters have pointed out, the OP is something of a bad joke. Is there some reason for perpetuating this thread, other than as an opportunity to sling a lot of partisan mud?