It appears to me that there has not been a justified war since we started embedding the media with our troops.

 

When is a war justified? When is it OK for a soldier to die in battle?

It appears to me that there has not been a justified war since we started embedding the media with our troops.

 

When is a war justified? When is it OK for a soldier to die in battle?

I am not sure what you mean with this. Wasn't there embedded newspaper reporters in WWII. I believe there was a famous one but his name escapes me.

It appears to me that there has not been a justified war since we started embedding the media with our troops.

 

When is a war justified? When is it OK for a soldier to die in battle?

 

 

Interesting and extremely simplistic reason for all the dissension. The truth is we have fought wars that others protested, strongly protested in the Halls of Congress and on the streets.

 

WW I saw the rise of the socialists in our country because they saw the war as the influence of monetary leaders protecting their investments in a Europe that was stalemated on the Western Front.

 

The Mexican War was decried by none other than Congressman Abraham Lincoln from the floor of the House. (He was not alone either) Many in the nation felt it was Polk's contrived war and plan - not some noble cause to defend the Texas border.

 

Many blamed James Madison for the War of 1812 and his posturing leading us into a conflict we were not ready for.

 

So to say "imbedded reporters" are the problem doesn't take into account the many other times many stood up to say we were engaged in an unjust and uneccesary war.

Interesting and extremely simplistic reason for all the dissension. The truth is we have fought wars that others protested, strongly protested in the Halls of Congress and on the streets.

 

WW I saw the rise of the socialists in our country because they saw the war as the influence of monetary leaders protecting their investments in a Europe that was stalemated on the Western Front.

 

The Mexican War was decried by none other than Congressman Abraham Lincoln from the floor of the House. (He was not alone either) Many in the nation felt it was Polk's contrived war and plan - not some noble cause to defend the Texas border.

 

Many blamed James Madison for the War of 1812 and his posturing leading us into a conflict we were not ready for.

 

So to say "imbedded reporters" are the problem doesn't take into account the many other times many stood up to say we were engaged in an unjust and uneccesary war.

 

Apparently none of those wars seemed justied either.

Apparently none of those wars seemed justied either.

 

 

Correct. That's how many (not necessarily the majority) felt during those conflicts and none of them had "embedded reporters" to slant the story one way or another.

Apparently none of those wars seemed justied either.

 

Is any war automatically justified as long as the President says it is?

If the peaceniks were so influential in the early 70's then how did Nixon win by such a landslide? The war began to grind down for the US by '73 but we were still escalating the area with our invasion of Cambodia to cut off supplies to VC in 1970.

 

My only point HHS was that we seem to pick and choose which dictator is worth changing and which one is not.

The Dems best candidate was McGovern. With Nixon declaring peace was at hand in late October 1972, McGovern didn't stand a chance. Further, Nixon reduced troop strength in Vietnam starting in 1969.

 

I agree that we shouldn't have been there in the first place. It just goes to show that Democrats aren't any better at picking wars than Republicans are.

I am not sure what you mean with this. Wasn't there embedded newspaper reporters in WWII. I believe there was a famous one but his name escapes me.

There's a big difference between Ernie Pyle and the jokers that are embedded today.

Correct. That's how many (not necessarily the majority) felt during those conflicts and none of them had "embedded reporters" to slant the story one way or another.

 

So were these wars justified? Was it OK that soldiers died in these conflicts?

So were these wars justified? Was it OK that soldiers died in these conflicts?

 

Making sweeping generalizations about anything (wars, liberals, black people, rich people, politicians, etc.) is what leads to developing a simplistic view of the world, and thinking that every problem has an easy answer.

 

In direct response to your question, I will say that our participation in World War II was clearly justified. OUR country had been directly attacked by an enemy, who had allied themselves with others already in a drive to conquer the world.

 

So, in regards to WWII, I would say "Yes". In regards to Vietnam (which I consider the other extreme), I would say no. In regards to Iraq, I would say that it has replaced the place of Vietnam, in terms of a misguided, useless, and totally avoidable war.

 

The good news is that at least this administration has not committed the mistake that Kennedy/Johnson did in placing the execution of the war in the hands of an absolutely unqualified moron like MacNamara. Instead, we have Rumsfeld. I have nothing but contempt for Rumsfeld, but to his credit, he isn't trying to prosecute this war as badly as MacNamara did in Vietnam.

 

Thank God for small miracles.

 

 

Frances

In regards to Iraq, I would say that it has replaced the place of Vietnam, in terms of a misguided, useless, and totally avoidable war.

Not that it justifies it at all, but just a general observation.

 

Haven't we been fighting these in our country's entire existence?

The Dems best candidate was McGovern. With Nixon declaring peace was at hand in late October 1972, McGovern didn't stand a chance. Further, Nixon reduced troop strength in Vietnam starting in 1969.

 

I agree that we shouldn't have been there in the first place. It just goes to show that Democrats aren't any better at picking wars than Republicans are.

 

 

I would agree with that :thumb:

 

FWIW, I would say Edmund Muskie might have been the best candidate if he weren't sabatoged by Segretti.

 

In 1974, Segretti plead guilty to three misdemeanor counts of distributing illegal (in fact, forged) campaign literature and was sentenced to prison. One notable example of his wrong-doing was a faked letter on Democratic presidential candidate Edmund Muskie's letterhead falsely alleging that U.S. Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson, a fellow Democrat, had had an illegitimate child with a 17-year-old.

So were these wars justified? Was it OK that soldiers died in these conflicts?

 

 

I would say no on some of them and maybe on some of the others.

 

If you are looking for the classical definition of "Just War" then look under WW II.

 

It would be difficult to say the same for the Mexican War, the Spanish-American War and Vietnam in my eyes.

 

Does that answer it some?

I would say no on some of them and maybe on some of the others.

 

If you are looking for the classical definition of "Just War" then look under WW II.

 

It would be difficult to say the same for the Mexican War, the Spanish-American War and Vietnam in my eyes.

 

Does that answer it some?

 

I does. I didn't ask the question to be arguementative. I am not much of an historian, nor do I claim to be. It just seems to me that every war we have fought, with the exception of WWII and the Revolutionary War, were seem as unjustified by some. Yet all seemed justified at least by a majority of congress when they began.

 

I think anytime someones son, daughter, wife, or husband is killed in action it is hard to make sense out of it unless our country is directly under attack.

 

As a result the intense media coverage and scrutinty has made it more difficult for our leaders to justify any military action.

I does. I didn't ask the question to be arguementative. I am not much of an historian, nor do I claim to be. It just seems to me that every war we have fought, with the exception of WWII and the Revolutionary War, were seem as unjustified by some. Yet all seemed justified at least by a majority of congress when they began.

 

I think anytime someones son, daughter, wife, or husband is killed in action it is hard to make sense out of it unless our country is directly under attack.

 

As a result the intense media coverage and scrutinty has made it more difficult for our leaders to justify any military action.

 

 

I think you are right. The personal issue is what makes the ground swell of support fail among the population.

 

It's usually easier to be "for a war" before it actually becomes the activity of war.