Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The_Jazz
|
"Unilateral" changes when dealing with the US because we've got worshipers. If the US declared war on Mars tomorrow, the UK and Australia (maybe even Spain) would have our backs. Why? Well it has jack to do with Mars, I'll tell you that.
What this means is that "unilateral" for the US means something different. And it's okay to admit that while the dictionary says one thing, reality demonstrates otherwise. Unilateral for the US means that the UN and most of our allies have told us to shut up and sit back down but we and our religious followers aren't listening.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The_Jazz
|
Yes, I'd say that's a perfect example of what I'm talking about.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The_Jazz
Bay of Pigs - strawman much, will? Tell me exactly how many US troops you think were involved in this little fiasco? If you name any number greater than zero, then you're wrong. CIA operatives/spies don't count since they're not military, and that is what we (and Obama) are talking about, exclusively. Bringin up the Bay of Pigs is completely pointless since it has zero bearing on what we're discussing.
|
Seeing as you're so dictionary-happy tonight, I'm surprised you didn't bother to look up "troops" before throwing it at me.
–noun
1. an assemblage of persons or things; company; band.
2. a great number or multitude: A whole troop of children swarmed through the museum.
3. Military. an armored cavalry or cavalry unit consisting of two or more platoons and a headquarters group.
4. troops, a body of soldiers, police, etc.: Mounted troops quelled the riot.
5. a unit of Boy Scouts or Girl Scouts usually having a maximum of 32 members under the guidance of an adult leader.
6. a herd, flock, or swarm.
1 out of 6 definitions refers to military. I was using #4, in case you were wondering.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The_Jazz
Will, your theories don't line up with what actually happened. And Obama didn't say that he wouldn't seek a peaceful solution. He said that he would respond with force IF SOMEONE ATTACKS US OR IS ABOUT TO ATTACK US. He said nothing about unilateral invasions. If he did, please point it out to me. If not, drop it because you're wrong. Look back at the quote and show me where he said anything about invasions. I agree that he most likely would not have invaded Iraq, but you're making huge assumptions and putting words in the man's mouth that he not only didn't say but didn't even come close to saying.
|
Someone "about to attack us" was how we got into Iraq in the first place. I'm surprised people still haven't learned from this. Imminent threat has been used as pretense to be the aggressor in war for thousands of years. It will stop being effective the second people see it for what it really is. But they likely won't.