The Dwindling Republican Business Base: It's the Economy, Stupid

you mean when eisenhower sent in military advisers? The insurgency predated that.

 

whatever the timeline is, we were in there under the doctrine of the domino theory before the north and south broke out in official war. that's preemptive enough for me.

 

Blaming Vietnam on Eisenhower is like blaming the current police action in Iraq on George HW Bush. They both certainly started the ball rolling, but there were many chances for others to stop it.

 

so you are saying eisenhower launched us into your rather flimsy definition of a preemptive war?

If true, this does not support your original proposition.

 

i haven't come close to saying that. wars start because you're either defending yourself or you're the initiater. if you're the one initiating the war, then it is more or less a preemptive war for your side. and why did we feel the need to send troops and advisers/weapons into South Vietnam? because of the domino theory.

when did we first officially engage the North? '64? '65? thats when the preemptive war to prevent the fulfillment of the domino theory started.

 

we first engaged the north well after the viet cong insurgency started - by the north.

your definition of preemptive war is dumbly overbroad and overbroadly dumb. Every country that goes to war goes to war to prevent a certain result. Accordingly every combatant in an armed conflict fits this definition.

The term as used in the modern sense means something entirely different.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preemptive_war

Do you want to spend the rest of the thread arguing over wording and how to interpret that wording?

 

Nice little graph
http://www.well.com/~sunbear/deficit.jpg
http://www.cynicalnation.com/img/pork2.gif
http://www.thechiefsource.com/hello/379906/1024/Federal_Spending_bar_graph-2005.09.18-09.57.03.jpg

You know the talk. They dream of fiscal responsibility and small government. They make their dreams known, especially during election time. But as historically shown, those ideals remained in their dreams.

The post election reality is filled with graft, corruption, nepotism, tax evasion, lobbying. There is money to rake, favorites to repay, mistakes to make.

How could anyone in power resist? What else is a politician suppose to do? Hypocrisy and accountability be damned.

It is like all the talk about pre-martial sex from the religious. But if you know anything about your daughter you would know she is a w****. Or ugly. Sometimes both.

Handout is the 8th sin. Unless it goes to the goes to the corporation and stock holders.

And then there are those who think they are in the club, or belong there some day. Sometimes they are happy with the leftover. Rich pretend to be the mega riches. Dogs loyal to their masters.

You are never in the picture.

 

Not really, because your definition of vietnam as a preemptive war in the same sense as Iraq is fundamentally wrong as previously discussed.

 

ok fine then. we'll simply agree to disagree and leave it at that.

 

What the hell are you guys talking about.

Good enough for me, base on that

Iraq - unnecessary war. Seriously does anyone still buy that WMD crap? Bush didn't preempt anything.

Korea - defensive war and later on counter offense, as part of UN resolution

Vietnam - A great place on earth that unfortunately holds no physical interest to US. An unnecessary war that is. But of course we have to be there because we got the bomb and what the hell, they don't think we rule? Let's show them! Same as USSR and Afghanistan.

Of course, everyone and their dogs have gazillion reasons to fight unnecessary wars with someone else's child. Usually they don't like it to be known as ass kicking because we can (we think), so it's label as preventive.

An actual valid example of preemptive war would be Israel's 6 day war in 1967.

Now let's get back and talk about how anyone is crazy if they think the economy is not well and prosper, because in Bush we trust.

 

definately not a neutral piece of writing. but very interesting.

although i agree with many of the points in this article, in defense of repubs, the dot com bust happened under clinton. although it may not have been as severe as the other mentioned recessions, it was a significant economic setback.



korea was not a preemtive war. after ww2 the super powers agreed to allow koreans to decide if they would become communist or democratic. russias sphere of influence was the north while the US was the south. i believe the north "won" the referendum (their population was much greater at that time coupled with the fact that the communists would only let you vote one way...). the south/US refused to recognize the results. hence the north invaded the south. UN/US came to the defense... we all know the rest of what happened.

 

the domino theory (itself a theory based on assumptions and suspicions) was used to justify being in Vietnam before the Gulf of Tonkin and actual invasion. I see the parallels betwen Vietnam and Iraq in this regard. You and Sam disagree. i am fine with that.

so sollie, me no speak inga-lish too well-a






and no, i know you don't mean it in that way, but I normally resort to humor when someone calls me stupid. i find it's more productive than retorting back with a "well so are you" comment.

EDIT: The GOP screwed up a lot more than the economy.

 

You basically said it then. The parallel is that these two wars are unnecessary and unpopular, not they are preemptive wars.

I hope no one broke a keyboard over this